When Policy Bites Like A Tick: Politics 201

In another 1,000 years [God willing], words would have likely changed meaning several times.
English may have gone extinct as have many previous languages.
Yet the Word of God, regardless of word choice or language, will speak the same message.

Some people may believe that a politician's job is to serve the public's sentiments, not their personal sentiments.

The politician is to remove themselves and their personal judgements from the equation.

Actors, in other words.

Some people may believe that a politician's job is to serve through their personal sentiments, regardless of public sentiment.

The political is to keep themselves and their personal sentiments in the equation.

Real people, in other words.

Notice we have both and a mix flowing from one to the other and back again.

Some politicians are liked because they expresses a view their supporters agree with.

Or at least this is what is promoted during a campaign repeatedly through slogan.

Some of the most favored politicians have been those that say the right things, in the right way, but you never learn their true sentiments.

I use the word 'right' not meaning morally right, but the use of words very carefully and precisely.

Wordcraft.

If you viewed the documentary I shared in part 101, you may have glimpsed behind the wizard's curtain.

You have noticed one tune being sung for the public to consume, and another tune when the actors would go back to being themselves.

Look at the moment in the Wizard of Oz when Toto reveals someone and something... a moment that speaks to government's typical nature.

Perhaps your favored politicians or party are talking about issues you find most important, or maybe they are reflecting a cultural background or a certain value set as yourself.

Whatever the case, agreement is fostered and people gather around their favored race horse.

But deciding on a candidate is not like choosing a race horse.

A race horse's goal is to win, (or place, or show for the sophisticated gambler).

It is perceived that in a democracy, there is no guessing or gambling.

But wars have started, persisted, under all kinds of political leadership.

A human being is carried along according to their ideas.

The 2016 U.S. presidential cycle had me favoring one particular candidate.

I liked them not because I agreed with them on every single issue.

I appreciated the manner they were able to discuss a topic.

They were quite logical and respectful in their delivery, showing a decent character and knowledge of most issues.

There were quite a few positions this candidate and I sharply disagreed on.

A night and day difference.

However, I was qualifying them according to their experience in the game of politics.

I knew that no matter what, they were still a human being and nearsighted to a bunch of things like any other human being.

Not that I would entrust them with things valuable to me, but I trusted they would do as politicians do.

A track record of voting according to what they viewed as 'right', and a demeanor reflecting respect for what they were about.

Their rhetoric, as far as I could tell, was according to statistics and measured evidence.

No amount of convincing from them would change my mind about the issues we differed on.

The differences we had in opinion or in views did not blind me from noticing they were able to do a decent job regarding the agreeable matters.

Here's a fun experiment:

Try finding someone in your circle of friends, or your favorite religious group, who agrees with you on every single political issue.

Perhaps you have a spouse or a dear friend or relative who comes close to mirroring every issue as you see it... but this is doubtful since we are not race horses bred to simply run fast.

Each of us, although living at the same time on the same planet, can be worlds apart in our minds (and hearts) when it comes to matters of the heart and ideas in the mind.

Compromise.

Most political issues can be resolved through some form of compromise.

However, there are some issues that still need to be fully explored and discussed to their logical end.

In this way, to default at compromise would be akin to voting for immorality.

We need to define what kind of government is presently available to us... and what kind of government was initiated some years ago.

Is it a government that acknowledges openly and unequivocally the God of Love?

Is Christ the Lord recognized as the God of Love?

Is His testimony the litmus test of what is right from wrong, moral from immoral, just from unjust?

If not, then it should be no surprise what has developed.

Wars persist.

Men have written laws to allow for both aggression and defense, for covert offices and hidden practices.

Immorality and depravity is rationalized and legislated as a 'right'.

Murder is confused to be 'just' through the use of legal and medical terms when executing the unborn and the criminal.

Scandals, low manners, immoral discourse were things that typically disqualified a politician from public office.

Not any more it seems.

A new era seems to be upon us... but it is a return to times previous.

This is nothing new.

What seems surprisingly novel is a falling back of sorts.

Although streets have been paved and a sidewalk exists, people are comfortably walking in the gutter.

Open rebelliousness and proud depravity in circles where some level of dignity was expected... is not expected anymore.

To say it loosely, the 'gloves are off'.

Fisticuffs is the fashion now.

For some of us, the question of character still plays a major role.

This won't change no matter the public sentiment or how raging mad the mob becomes.

What is valuable in political terms is how a person's character is portrayed in the media.

The frosting on the cake in U.S. politics has been picked off by someone's impatient fingers.

For some of us, the cake is all frosting... a sugary mess with nothing viable underneath.

In other countries, the manner some media works hard at portraying their leaders in a good light is still evident.

It isn't a matter of portraying a false reality, but exposing the shortcomings in a constructive way.

How do you keep two raging drunks from fighting?... when they are already drunk and angry and eager to fight?

A comfortable and constant strife is the norm.

The transparency that is happening is not what was expected.

What is booming apparently transparent is that so-called leaders are not saints... nor were they trying to be, but only 'seem' like.

The real issues that are most pressing, no matter how they are pushed into a back seat by politician or media personality alike, never go away.

The work of doing what is right is not for those who claim to lead, but those who lead by example.

When the righteous thrive, the people rejoice; 

when the wicked rule, the people groan. 

A man who loves wisdom brings joy to his father, 

but a companion of prostitutes squanders his wealth. 

By justice a king gives a country stability, 

but those who are greedy for bribes tear it down. 

Those who flatter their neighbors are spreading nets for their feet. 

Evildoers are snared by their own sin, 

but the righteous shout for joy and are glad. 

The righteous care about justice for the poor, 

but the wicked have no such concern. 

Mockers stir up a city, but the wise turn away anger. 

- Proverbs 29: 2-8

When reading that passage from the Proverbs, don't only see those realities in politicians or media personalities you oppose.

Notice each of them in those you favor... for they are present.

Continued in Politics 301.

Read Politics 101.