RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

A Plea for a New Generation of Republican Leadership

by Brian McLaren 09-08-2009

I believe our nation works best with robust and civic dialogue and civil debate. For mature societal conversations to take place, at least two mature parties are required, and looking back over this summer, a second party is hard to find.

The Obama administration needs a worthy loyal opposition, just as any group in power does, and the president himself often says so. But people who shout “Hitler, Nazi, socialist” don’t constitute a worthy loyal opposition. Nor do the birthers (who don’t stray too far from the fictional portrait of the afterbirthers described satirically here). Nor do the nostalgics, who seem to keep waking up in the 1980s year after year, quoting Ronald Reagan.

[Regarding the nostaligics, one can't help but recall God's words to Joshua (Joshua 1:2): "Moses my servant is dead." Many Republicans, it seems, are like Joshua and need to be told it's time to move on and discover their own voice, to think their own thoughts, to face today's challenges, to start leading constructively and not just repeating old slogans -- always revering the memory of their late-20th-century Moses, of course, but moving on to face today's problems just as their oft-sung hero sought to face those of his day.]

It seemed hard for the situation to deteriorate below gun-toting protestors at town hall meetings and Hitler-mustached posters, but we managed to hit a new even-lower low in recent days in the refusal of some parents and school districts to allow schoolchildren to listen to the presidential back-to-school address. Journalist-author Thomas Friedman had it right on “Meet the Press” Sunday, as did Education Secretary Ame Duncan on “Face the Nation”: that reaction is just plain “stupid” and “silly.” How many Republican leaders will stand with them?

Where does this bizarre behavior come from? True, there’s a strain of extremism that runs through American politics on the left and right, and the Internet, late-night radio, and cable TV help keep it alive. But there’s more to this, I think. I’m convinced that there is some degree of white fear and resentment behind at least some of this reaction: fear and resentment of an African-American president, mingled with xenophobia regarding brown-skinned immigrants, undergirded by fear of a future where there is no more racial majority status for white people. There is also, I suspect, a good amount of modernist fear of postmodernity mixed in. And where Christianity becomes a tribal religion rather than a reconciling faith — the exclusive and combative religion of rural non-coastal folks, for example, or Southern folks, or socially conservative folks, or folks who hold a certain economic ideology — there is probably some old-fashioned religious supremacy at play too: the “Our God is better than your god, so we should be in power” syndrome.

I keep wondering — don’t more Republicans themselves see the danger of an increasingly reactionary Republican party becoming in the 21st century what anti-civil-rights/pro-segregationists and McCarthyites were in the 20th, or what the pro-slavery/anti-abolition movements were in the 19th — conserving an unjust status quo that deserved to be left behind? Out of love for their party and the good things it could potentially stand for in 2012 and beyond, don’t they want to step forward now and be counted?

Even if all President Obama stands for were as dastardly as the shouters, birthers, and nostalgics insinuate, can’t some perceptive Republicans see the need to do what President Obama did to win the election — to inspire with some hope, rather than constantly pulling the levers of fear? Fear is indeed a powerful short-term motivator (and fundraiser), as is revenge, but it uses an inflating currency (and where do you go after flashing the Hitler/Nazi/fascist credit card?). An unregulated fear-based politics will eventually crash just as an unregulated bubble-based economy will, but like a crashing economy, it can cause a huge amount of damage on its way down.

That’s why it’s so depressing to see the paucity of Republican leadership providing a mature alternative to all this. That’s why, with so much at stake — from environmental policy to health-care reform to immigration reform to economic reform to foreign policy reform to campaign finance reform, even those of us who are firm supporters of President Obama wish his administration had a more robust conversation partner and a wiser, more constructive loyal opposition.

Thankfully, George Will has started speaking up with some fresh things to say, countering the long reign of neoconservative foreign policy in the Republican Party. Perhaps people like Will and Peggy Noonan represent the rise of a constructive conversation partner in the civic conversation. But they’re writers; where are the politicians? If there are some perceptive Republicans out there who see from the inside what the rest of us see from the outside, I hope they’ll start speaking up like George Will and Peggy Noonan — and soon. Because if the best leaders the Republicans can offer the nation and the world in the next decade are the likes of … well, I won’t mention names … then everyone will be worse off for it — Republicans, Democrats, everyone. I believe, hope, and pray that Republicans can do better for their party, for America as a whole, and for the world.

Brian McLarenBrian McLaren (brianmclaren.net) is a speaker and author, most recently of Everything Must Change and Finding Our Way Again.

Categories: Faith and Politics
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • jazzact13
    --I’m convinced that there is some degree of white fear and resentment behind at least some of this reaction: fear and resentment of an African-American president

    Yep, when all else fails, accuse us conservatives of racism. It's a lie, but the press won't call you on it, and nor will sojo.

    --There is also, I suspect, a good amount of modernist fear of postmodernity mixed in.

    Oh, does this mean you've finally figured out what postmodernism is, Mr. McLaren? You aren't waffling on it now, like you did in A New Kind of Christian? Are you ready to commit to saying what postmodernism is?

    --And where Christianity becomes a tribal religion rather than a reconciling faith — the exclusive and combative religion of rural non-coastal folks, for example, or Southern folks, or socially conservative folks, or folks who hold a certain economic ideology

    More racism and regionalism on your part, Mr. McLaren. Tsk, tsk. I though you said in Everything Must Change that we shouldn't call names. Shame you don't practice what you write.

    --Even if all President Obama stands for were as dastardly as the shouters, birthers, and nostalgics insinuate, can’t some perceptive Republicans see the need to do what President Obama did to win the election — to inspire with some hope, rather than constantly pulling the levers of fear?

    Maybe if you actually listened instead of operating on preconceived notions, you'd know that we do talk about hope. But this administration is against the things that make for hope, so there is nothing wrong with calling out that that is what's going on. Your socialistic agenda offers no hope--take that from someone who's been to a formal socialistic nation, I know what you're ideas are heading for, and they stink.

    But so long as you're idea of "robust and civic dialogue and civil debate" is accusing the other side of racism and other nasty things, you'll not see that you are the one not engaging in such debate. Either learn a thing or two before writing again, or return to your religious liberal cave, please, because this article is singularly unhelpful to you.
  • Yep, when all else fails, accuse us conservatives of racism. It's a lie, but the press won't call you on it, and nor will sojo.

    Well, unless the conservatives actively reject racism and embrace reconciliation -- and most do not -- they will have that stigma because, in fact and despite your protestations, racism was always a major component of the modern conservative movement. There is a reason why most African-Americans vote Democratic, and it's not because of "welfare goodies" or affirmative action.

    Your socialistic agenda offers no hope--take that from someone who's been to a formal socialistic nation, I know what you're ideas are heading for, and they stink.

    Look who's calling names now. This is exactly the kind of unhelpful commentary that McLaren is talking about.
  • jazzact13
    --Well, unless the conservatives actively reject racism and embrace reconciliation -- and most do not

    You have got to be kidding me. If you really believe, you truly need to get out more.

    --There is a reason why most African-Americans vote Democratic,

    Yep, there are several. Sadly, most are lies.
  • If you really believe, you truly need to get out more.

    Having lived among whites for most of my life, even attending mostly-white churches, I'm not the person to whom you should be making those statements.

    Yep, there are several. Sadly, most are lies.

    They'll tell you that you're the one who's lying.
  • jazzact13
    --Having lived among whites for most of my life, even attending mostly-white churches, I'm not the person to whom you should be making those statements.

    Yes, you are. Conservatives have rejected racism, if they ever embraced it at all. You're looking in the wrong direction for it.

    --They'll tell you that you're the one who's lying.

    Except I'm not.
  • Who was it that MLK Jr. fought in the South, for example, and whom have
    African-Americans had to challenge elsewhere? Who threatened the ministry of
    Billy Graham when he placed a black man on his staff in the late 1950s? Who
    were the people who chafed when even Bill McCartney -- who will tell you that
    he himself benefited from "white privilege" -- started speaking passionately
    on the subject at Promise Keepers meetings? So I don't want to hear it.
  • Huntergreen
    If you look back with an eye for detail, you will notice that the status quo of the south was Democratic. The Klan was primarily composed of that party. In fact we still have an old Byrd in the senate that was a Klansman. If you dare check out who repressed the blacks after the civil war. It was the Democrats. Sure, there have been derelicts on both sides of the aisle but history (unrevised) will show the Democratic party as no friend to the Black. By demonizing conservatism, democrats (especially so-called progressives) have instilled a resentment that has robbed the black community of moral and political objectivity.
  • Sorry, but you miss a lot of detail.

    In 1948 there was a major revolt in the ranks of Southern Democrats, with
    Strom Thurmond leading the charge against Harry Truman (who issued an
    executive order integrating the Armed Forces), even running for president
    against him on the "Dixiecratic" ticket; and in the 1960s the national
    Democratic Party got serious about civil rights, further angering Southerners.
    Seeing an opening, Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater
    announced his opposition to the civil-rights movement (albeit not for racist
    reasons; nevertheless, that got the attention of many of those Southerners and
    Thurmond would eventually switch his affiliation. Feeling some momentum two
    years later, Richard Nixon and aide Pat Buchanan campaigned for GOP
    congressional candidates in the South, where the party became a legitimate
    entity for the first time since Reconstruction; Reagan's election completed
    the turnaround. Bottom line, the Southern segregationists generally left the
    Democratic Party for the Republican Party; those that stayed such as Robert
    Byrd moderated their views. In fact, Trent Lott, Phil Gramm and a number of
    others actually started their political careers as Democrats.

    Furthermore, the "religious right" got started in 1978 when the Carter
    Administration sicced the IRS on private Christian schools in the South that
    he suspected were founded to evade court-ordered desegregation in public
    schools. (Carter, of course being a Southerner, understood the dynamics quite
    well.)

    For these and other reasons, the idea that "conservatives" were ever on the
    side of African-Americans on a political basis is absolutely ridiculous.
  • Huntergreen
    BlueDeacon, I very rarely comment on blogs, mostly because I don't have the time, but partly because people are so blinded by the the rhetoric fed them. Once you swallow that pill your not your own person. For the record, I choose not to be D or R because it causes you to defend what you don't embrace.
    Each of your citations seem to be taken with narrow field of view as if you are trying extrapolate the tidbits from each that form your worldview. Do yourself a favor and dispense with the filters that form opinions and drop the resentments. I don't deny there are Southern bigots (as well as anywhere else) but that is not the primary reason of the migration. Its the moral element.

    Ask yourself why the Blue areas of this country are so bankrupt. Crime and corruption is many many times higher. Demographics alone should cause people to reassess developed opinions. I wish you well.
  • With all due respect, you showed that, in this instance, you truly don't know
    what you're talking about. And I have a problem with that.

    For openers, you mentioned that the Democratic Party was the true oppressor of
    African-Americans; however, that was true only in the South because the
    Republican Party was quite literally persona non grata down there because it
    destroyed slavery. Blacks began to switch to the Democratic Party in the
    North thanks to FDR, which is why the national Democratic Party eventually
    became supportive of civil rights; in response, the reactionary right began
    going Republican, where it has remained today. This is historical fact, and
    if you don't want to accept it ... well, I can't help you.

    As for the "moral element," that's also ridiculous because those issues didn't
    come to light until the 1970s at the earliest. Roe v. Wade took place
    only in 1973 and gay rights didn't become an issue until about a decade later,
    and even there the folks who took the "conservative" side even today represent
    only a minority of voters. On top of that, even many African-Americans are
    anti-abortion and anti-gay-marriage, but that doesn't stop them from
    supporting Democratic candidates.

    The point is that the conservative movement has always tried to run away from
    its shameful record on race and racism; if anyone is resentful here it's the
    right because it doesn't want to face the reality that it consistently has
    acted unjustly. This particular thread, because of the touchiness of the
    conservatives that have contributed to it, has proved that beyond a doubt.
  • Who was it that MLK Jr. fought in the South, for example, and whom have
    African-Americans had to challenge elsewhere? Who threatened the ministry of
    Billy Graham when he placed a black man on his staff in the late 1950s? Who
    were the people who chafed when even Bill McCartney -- who will tell you that
    he himself benefited from "white privilege" -- started speaking passionately
    on the subject at Promise Keepers meetings? So I don't want to hear it.
  • letjusticerolldown
    "accuse us conservatives of racism. It's a lie"

    And he didn't.

    He said, "I’m convinced that there is some degree of white fear and resentment behind at least some of this reaction."

    Please debate the content of his point and explain why. You may well be right.
  • lumens
    He is taking the most extreme expressions of a particular viewpoint and applying them to all who support that viewpoint. All one needs to do to counter the argument is take some piece of extreme leftist rhetoric and apply it to McLaren's political viewpoint.

    That is the opposite of robust dialogue, wouldn't you agree?
  • kevinmcgill
    I get it. Bush is your man. And a lot of things that were done to "President Bush" was wrong! Including that stupid movie on his life. But liberals are like that. My beef which I believe is on point with this article is that Republicans have jumped into the sewer too. Everyone has the right to like or dislike a leader but come on. Let's show some class. I've voted for President Bush (Father and son) both times, and would do it again. And I am a black conservative. And the only way we're ever going to get the White House back is becoming smarter, doing the hard work, and becoming worthy advisaries. Have a good day Liz Taylor!
  • lumens
    Alright. You're conservative and I'm not Liz Taylor. I'm always leery of
    the phenomenon you find on Amazon, where a liberal gives a one star rating
    to a conservative-leaning book he hasn't read, and introduces himself as a
    liberal.

    Bush wasn't really my man, and I could have strangled him over TARP.

    I agree that some Republicans have jumped into the sewer, and it's
    obnoxious. I think the number of Republicans who are shouting and comparing
    Obama to Hitler are much smaller than the press is making out. There was
    shouting and chanting at town halls, but I don't find that particularly
    problematic.

    I don't understand why you see these attacks as particularly racist. Obama
    is being called a fascist because that's kind of the shiny new toy for
    conservatives who have been revisiting the history of fascist ideology in
    American politics. Jonah Goldberg's book (which actually isn't too bad) has
    a whole chapter on Hillary, so you can bet the chants would be the same were
    she elected.
  • kevinmcgill
    If it's not racism, then what do you call it? The yelling, the accusing the man of not being born here, the Hitler/Obama posters, it's like nothing I've ever seen. Funny, some whites today have changed there speech, behavior, but not their attitudes. But when someone with discernment can see something that walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then we're told "that not what that is." It's the same old thing. And trying to tell us don't call me a racist when everything about this is racist is rediculous. I am conservative, a republican, and black. I've voted Republican right down the line. But I see waht going on with this man. He hasn't been in office half the term and you make him out to be worst that Satan. You didn't do that to any of the other presidents before him.
  • natcoz
    Maybe some "conservatives" are racist...and I'm betting some "liberals" are racist too. It makes no sense to pull the racist card when someone raises an issue they feel is legitimate and doesn't mention race. And it makes no sense to stereotype the folks who object to Obama's speech to school children. Sure, sure...many of them might not be thinking objectively, and may be just jumping on the band wagon. But even that can't necessarily be classified as racism.

    There are plenty of reasons to dislike what Obama has done and is doing without even being aware of his race. And yes, it's perfectly legitimate to raise the issue of natural-born citizenship, since the constitution was written that way for a reason (a reason which most people no longer understand).

    How are we gonna get out of this bi-partisanship? Doesn't anyone see that it's not about Repubs vs. Dems? There's more going on here than the drama we see in the media. We've gotta be smarter than this.

    Democracy is indeed a problem. This article explains why. http://mises.org/story/3686

    We've gotta wise up and rise above the pettiness.
  • kevinmcgill
    Sorry it just doesn't add up. I'm weighing the thoughts and actions of some against this man because I not only hear the words but I see the faces. These are not calm rational people, they're emotionally charged to the point it puts my stomach in knots. I lived to long a experienced too much for people to tell me when something like this is right. And as far as natural born citizen ship goes, his birth certificate has been on display numerous times, but that still not good enough. And it's not legitimate unless you going to do it to every president. And as far as his speech was concerned, people objected before knowing the content of the speech. Only that it was from President Obama. When you judge a man before you know a man what do you call that? And yes I agree some liberals are racists too. Only I'n this side of the fence with people that I believed in. Don't tell me it's not there.
  • kevinmcgill
    Go in peace my friend. Were all Americans.
  • lumens
    I gave back the point that one of the liberal clan took away, since you didn't violate any of the rules of conduct.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008