Column on civil political speech

It seems to me that a number of the loudest voices for wanting the Ten Commandments posted seem to be more than happy to violate the command against false witness, at least in politics. Perhaps, they feel that lying is permissible, even expected, in politics. Perhaps, their hatred of the very idea of a President Obama blinds them to accuracy. They are pre-disposed to see things in a negative light and are pleased to believe any negative account of his presidency and want others to share it. I have been influenced by old fashioned political reform movements. They hold to a notion of a world of ideas where accuracy matters. They said that truth was the best disinfectant for political corruption. They believed that if the people were well-informed, then the cream would rise to the top, and truth would triumph. One of my great disappointments in the age of new media is the race to the bottom. We have a wealth of facts at our fingertips, and we do not lift a finger to find them. Instead, the news programs have devolved into shouting talking heads who look for punch lines and labels. The shrillest voices broadcast their venom on the internet and talk radio 24 hours a day. I continue to shake my head at ideas that were out of the popular imagination a generation ago that would cause someone’s sanity to be questioned, are now part of political parlance routinely. I was afraid that this new age would threaten to drown us in a deluge of facts, but instead, facts have been thrown to the back of the media bus in favor of the phrase-making of sophistry, or in current parlance, advertising. Instead of gathering good data, instead of carefully analyzing it, we pass along lies right and left over the communications superhighway. Fund raising letters raise blood pressure as art form, all to get us to contribute, not on the basis of policy, experience, or history, but wild accusation. The Supreme Court opened this Pandora’s Box even wider with its decision to make sure that such speech is well-funded, under the ridiculous notion that “money talks.” Go on that great time vacuum, Facebook, and look a the political bile poured out in almost every posting. Rarely does it contain good information, but every new ways of calling one’s opponent nasty names. This new landscape of information is being constantly hyped, but at what cost are we throwing away literacy skills for propaganda. Art invites us to think, but propaganda tells us what to think and to feel. it cannot brook disagreement, since it is incapable of engaging in rational discourse. Over and over we see the terrible truth of a dictum of propaganda, say the same big lie over and over, and it will be accepted. Propaganda turns data into mere opinion, so it reduces political thought to mere preferences. A generation ago, we feared advertising political campaigns as if they were marketable products like soap. That fear of manipulation was not well-placed, as we seem to be more than willing to accept views that comport with our prejudices without any manipulation or pre-conscious chicanery. Where so many things claim or time, we appear to have given up on the time and work involved in making clear policy decisions. Slogans and labels are so much easier. For those few who claim moralistic grounds for their political misbehavior, I would remind us that slander is still a sin, as an outgrowth of the command against false witness. It is a deeper sin when it undercuts the needs of the public and not the reputation of a single individual. For people who claim to follow the way, the truth, and the life, it is a social crime to so devalue the truth.