Americans tend to be a little scrappy. Like most countries, we like our sports. We are great at choosing sides and pledging our allegiances. Once we choose a team, we are tenacious in our loyalty. When our team is down, we grouse, lick our wounds and fight for a victory next time. When our team is winning, we rejoice, knowing all is right with the world, and occasionally (or more than occasionally), we gloat. We are not “fair weather fans.” We bleed when our team bleeds, we cringe when our team fumbles or fouls, and we are beyond elated with our team’s victories. Studies have shown that entire cities of football fans eat more junk food when their teams lose. We defend our team and feel personally attacked when anyone points out our team’s weaknesses or flaws (or makes fun of our players or their mothers). We proudly wear our team colors.
Unfortunately, we behave the same way in regard to American politics. The two-party system promotes a choice between two imperfect “teams.” (We have been historically well-behaved sheep in this regard, making our team choices even when they are ill-fitting.) The entire country has chosen sides and those sides proudly wear their Red or Blue; we defend our chosen team at all costs, even when it directly opposes what we think of as our values. Republicans spent a lot of money? Democrats started a war? Somehow, we only remember our values — strongly — when the other team violates them. If our chosen team does something we dislike, we remain silent, as if our child committed a petty crime that we can’t quite face. We refuse to see the good in the other team, and blame for every ill can easily be laid on the “enemy’s” shoulders.
How is it that half the country is inherently “evil” and “stupid,” while the other half (our half) is “enlightened” and “responsible” and “good?” Sorry, folks, the world of black and white only exists in childhood and in fiction. As adults, we should recognize that every issue is grey and three-dimensional. Granted, trying to find facts about any issue is now tougher than ever, since few sources present fact without bias. But we don’t seem to mind. As die-hard fans, we like our news tinted Red or Blue. “My team’s preferred news sources don’t *feel* biased,” say the fans. “The other team’s sources, however, not only invent news but they are also evil.”
Somehow, the meaning of an election victory has also fundamentally shifted. Winning an election is now translated to mean “mandate.” More clearly stated, the last few Presidents have interpreted this to mean “my team’s agenda is backed by the will of the American people.” Suddenly, a divided country supports all of one party’s agenda? When did this interpretation start? Politicians must realize that a jump from one party to the other is a fundamental shift away from one extreme; the old party was too far right or too far left, and the country is making a “correction.”
One of the best quotes I have ever seen about American politics is from a 2011 article in The Atlantic: “Ours is a system focused not on collective problem-solving but on a struggle for power between two private organizations.” (The entire article is excellent, I highly recommend it. Read it here.) They’ve duped us into investing heart, soul and loyalty to one side of a war. They have no intention of coming together to fix anything.
The most difficult part to fathom from an independent standpoint is how each party allows its candidate/representative/President behavior or policy “passes” that would be loudly protested if made by the opposing party. Affairs, financial corruption or involvement in war seems to be excusable (or at least explainable) from our own but is reprehensible and unforgivable from the other side, serving as political ammunition in this ongoing battle. This is nothing more than “wearing the team colors,” OWNING that candidate/representative/President to the point that defending this “team member” is an extension of defending ourselves. Maybe we can call it “Party Blindness.” Studies have shown that political bias can even affect our ability to do math. We spin everything to put our team in the best light. After all, we can make excuses and arguments for any behavior from our candidate, and against anything from the other side.
ENOUGH.
Our political system was designed to promote collaborative problem-solving. Instead, we are so angry when “our side” compromises at all. “It’s our way or nothing!” shout both sides of the stadium, vehemently screaming while spittle and bile flies. This is the partisan hell that WE, as a nation, have built. As I said, we are die-hard fans. We will go to the grave waving our team colors. These teams, however, have agendas other than “the fans’” best interests. Keeping unions, corporations, lobbyists and special interests happy and getting re-elected are these teams biggest priorities.
Election season brings out much wooing of the Independent Voter. After all, the Die Hards vote party line (no decision required!). We, the Independents, are the ones who actually make the decisions on Election Day. This is a big responsibility for a group that is not represented by these parties. We hear rhetoric full of words like “collaboration” and “change” and “teamwork.” On election night, the winning candidate promptly forgets the Independent voters and declares a Blue or Red “mandate.” Independents are then completely ignored until next election season.
The tide, however, is turning.
In this game of political teams, Red vs. Blue, Independents have traditionally acted as referee, able to tip the scales one way or the other. This is a quickly-changing political climate, and Independents are not the minority we once were. We are now approximately 42% (and growing). This referee now has the power to call foul, eject all players and cancel the traditional game. Independents demand COLLABORATION. We demand RESULTS. We demand an atmosphere free from corruption, political theater and hate.
Some Independent words for the donkey-wearing Blue Team and the elephant-wearing Red Team:
1. More and more of us are sick and tired of this game and the teams involved.
2. Remember that “election victory” does not mean “mandate.” It means that Independents chose your candidate as the “least worst,” which is hardly a mandate.
3. Continue this behavior, and your base will consist of only the extremists of your parties. The rest will join the ranks of the disgruntled Independents, and we are large enough and angry enough to unite and overthrow this Red and Blue Duopoly.
I have always thought as a political independent, but at one time, I was a member of one of the parties. I remember the dread of seeing My Party or My President skewered on the news, and the glee of watching the Other Party skewered. Once I became an Independent and took off my fan colors for good, my viewpoint changed. I still had one toe in each party, but I was able to take the emotion out of it. I stopped “rooting” for my team to “win.” I was able to see that the world of politics is not black and white, and that grey is okay. There is a lot of work to do, and we cannot do it by focussing on the Red and the Blue.
Do yourself a favor. If neither of these two teams defines you, step away. Take off your team colors, set them aside and view this game as a referee with new, Independent eyes. Take a breath before making visceral, emotional responses and see what the facts reveal to you. View the activities and the words of these parties and see the rhetoric for the political theater it is. Listen to news stories with an ear for fact, and you will hear the biases that you didn’t recognize before. Try to view our American political animal without any personal “skin in the game,” with emotion benched on the sideline. If you succeed, you’ll be surprised (and possibly energized) by the view. I promise.
United Independents for a New Third Party 