No Room For Radicals?

No Room For Radicals?
by Michael R. Allen

Tuesday, September 28, 1999

Not too long ago, I was at a college orientation meeting at a certain Missouri university. There were the usual “icebreaker” activities, one of which provided some insight into the political outlook of the young generation and its parents. To establish some familiarity with each other's preferences, a speaker asked everyone in attendance to stand.

Then, everyone was told to congregate at two different areas according to the choice between preferences which were supposed to be diametric opposites. The first few were easy: cats versus dogs, country versus city, et cetera. The activity began to unravel with the choice of Flintstones versus Jetsons -- some people cried out for Scooby Doo.

The choice that tripped everyone, myself included, was one that may have been perfectly legitimate in 1860: Republicans versus Democrats. The following situation would have been no less difficult had the choice been purgatory versus hell.

Young people, normally in a fashionable apolitical mode, looked at each other cautiously. Some rock-ribbed suburbanites dashed to the GOP side of the room. Smug, mutton-chopped young men and perpetually depressed young women unflinchingly went to the Democrats. The remaining sixty percent stood in the middle, wondering if in post-impeachment America they should just shut up and walk over to the Messrs. Mutton-chop and Nose Ring.

I couldn’t resist interjecting: “Where do the anarchists go?” I was only half-joking.

Unfortunately, no one answered me with anything more substantial than pained expressions. Most of my fellow orientation-goers in the middle were there to avoid taking a hard stand on political issues -- parents and students alike. When I toned down my position to “libertarian,” a woman looked at me sympathetically.

“Oh, I know,” she started. “I don’t like the parties either.”

She missed my point. I was in the center of the room not because I couldn’t choose between the two parties, but because I could make a hard choice. The trouble was, my choice was not represented. I would have gladly gravitated to a “libertarian” part of the room, since hoping for a “paleo-libertarian noninterventionist” corner was too much to anticipate. But even “libertarian” was not an option.

This situation closely mirrors what is apparent in society at large. People are voting less and less not out of principle but the lack thereof. It is refreshing to have people who do not care about government, but it is distressing that they don't care about their liberties. Disdain for the political process is not helpful unless it encourages opposition to the politicization of everyday life. In America, government grows without restraint because of prevalent apathy.

Holding strong opinions is seen as a nuisance to the apathetic. How many times does one hear a commentator pooh-pooh the Waco raid’s importance, or use the cliché “move on after the impeachment”? How many people voted for Bill Clinton because they bought the lie that Republicans were extremists? Too many people have run to the dead, nonchallenging center. Those of us who make a fuss over illegal wars, or police raids that go awry threaten the complacent centrists who don't care about the old America that is lost.

The people who clung to the center in that room stayed right where they felt safest. For the two minutes that elapsed before the next choice was called out, they seemed content. I was standing on the fringe of the center, calling to mind the reassurance of Andrew Jackson that one man with courage makes a majority.

If the orientation session was indicative of societal attitudes on politics, a survey I took shortly afterwards will only reinforce the prevalent apathy. The survey contained a section on politics, with statements listed and little circles to fill in for disagreement, agreement, and -- of course -- no response. No room was available for questioning the statement's wording, or for saying it was partially wrong or based on flawed premises.

I went through the questions easily, despite my aversion to the format. Did I support the death penalty? No. Did I want guns banned? No. Did I want marijuana to be legal? Yes. Did I trust the government? No. Should homosexuals have the right to marry? Yes, no, maybe. The government can’t consign a right to anything, it either exists naturally or the “right” is actually a privilege. There wasn’t space for an explanation, so I guess “yes” was as good of an answer as any, because it surely confused the person who had to compute my next response.

“Describe your political ideology.” Without hesitating, and knowing my answer to be mostly wrong, I checked “far right.” Someone had to.

It seems us radicals have found ways to subvert the system from within, after all.

www.american-partisan.com