The Depoliticization of Inherently Political Issues and a Discussion on Neutrality
In out current society, we face the issue of trying to depoliticize inherently political issues in order to percieve all sides of the political spectrum as equal, which in our case we believe to be neutral. And this is simply another form of manipulating the public into deflecting responsibility, not only from the parties, but their voters, and perpetuating the status quo under which we so comfortably live. The truth is, everything is inherently political, because politics shapes the way we think about issues, and to pretend that these issues aren’t political, is to belittle the harm that certain political agendas cause. We are being blinded and this time is it disguised through ‘common sense’ and neutrality’.
This was extremely prevalent during the Black Lives Matter Movements spreading across the globe, just over a year ago. Variations of the phrase “Racism is a human rights issue, not politics” or a similar variation “racism is not a partisan issue” were seen across the internet. And of course, I understand what these messages are trying to get across- they want to promote everyone to caring about racism, and create a space where republicans, democrats, conservatives and labour members can put their partisan issues aside and band together for a cause which we should all believe in. Essentially, the phrases are trying to tell us “everyone should think racism is wrong”. And I don’t disagree, but I think these phrases miss the mark. You see, everyone should think racism is wrong, but not everyone does. And this does happen to align with political identity. Those that don’t see that racism is a big issue (whether actively holding racist ideas or simply disbelieving racism exists in 2021) tend to be within the same ideological sphere. Of course that isn’t to say that some parties have no racists- afterall ignorance can live anywhere- but it does happen to be more prominent within right wing politcal parties. And policies reflect that. Those who don’t believe in police brutality, or systemic oppression, or the attempts to stop the communities of colour from voting are unlikely to vote for politicians that do. In fact they may go out of their way to vote for those that share their often times bigotted views. And those that vote for them despite their racist or harmful opinions, clearly don’t find racism a dealbreaker and are happy to sit alongside it. And so whether you actively agree or not, by supporting a party which maintains outright racist beliefs or policies, you are perpetuating the racism it embodies. And you are not innocent from this. But yet to claim that certain issues are not partisan completely undermines this, and creates the idea that all people are as a foundation, not racist. And as we have seen this is incorrect. We have to work to be anti-racist, and we cannot claim to do so whilst not actively voting for the policies and parties which will help minority communities. And so, by saying that racism is not a political issue, we ignore the very real politics and policies which perpetuate it. There are parties, such as the Conservatives and the Republicans, who actively pass policies which heighten the power imbalance and see no problem with the current way we treat minorities, and so to say that racism is not political we ignore the very real impact of who we vote for, what that stands for and what politicians can do to change the world. It takes the power away from the people and makes it seem as though racism is this huge unchangeable force, which we almost have to accept. How can we fight something we don’t know the cause of? Racism does not stop at party lines, we all (regardless of ideology) have to unlearn out biases, but politics is a good way to start and a way we can be involved in the decision making which affects our everyday.
But of course this does not stop at racism, but rather it acted as the catalyst to thinking about this issue as a whole. Another contemporary example is masks, vaccines and social distancing. We saw, especially in the United States, that it became a political statement to comply (or not) with covid measures. “Masks shouldn’t be a political statement” and other such are seen throughout the media and again I see this as a fundamental misunderstanding of how society works as well as the success of the media in indoctrinating us as the public. Issues like these are political, because who we vote for not only can change things, but it is also a reflection of what we believe, and how we feel the world should function. Voting for parties which promote “freedom” and less government intervention means they are directly contributing to beliefs about not wearing the mask or the fear-mongering surrounding the vaccine. The politics we listen to and the people we trust shape the opinions we have, and so we must consider why 19% of Republicans thought masks were the most difficult part about the Pandemic and 37% were skeptical about mask efficacy and the severity of covid in general, as opposed to just 10% and 3% of the democrats asked (respectively). This is not something that they have thought of themselves, this is what they are fed and taught by those they look up to. It’s a viscious cycle of looking at people that reflect your beliefs and them impacting the beliefs you have. This causes a repeating cycle. So masks are a political statement, because some parties don’t believe in the dangers of the pandemic or solidarity with others and protecting them. Some parties care about those at risk, and others don’t, and this is inherently political.
And this is further reflected in the welfare systems and the way in which certain parties care for or consider those living in poverty. We know that the Conservatives, and/or right wing parties tend to have a much more individualistic view, as seen above with masks and vaccines, and believe that our successes or failures come from how hard we work, and those that are struggling simply haven’t worked hard enough. They believe we are entitled to everything we earn and that sharing via tax or charity should be a choice as opposed to an obligation. Many think that due to them surviving or ending a cycle of poverty that it is possible for everyone. And to me, this is selfish. And it may seem harsh for me to say this, but again, I don’t believe in presenting both parties as good, simply as they are. Instead, the left tends to be guided by the idea that we all deserve a comfortable living, and that we should work as a community for wider success as opposed to individual. And so this shapes our policy, but it also shapes the way we treat the poor and shapes what we believe people deserve. Our political beliefs are a representation of everything we believe about society, and we should stop considering that they are only what we believe policy should be.
You see, these issues are exactly the essence of politics. Because, contrary to popular belief- take the horseshoe theory as an example- all sides are not equal. And to do so would be to misrepresent both the parties and its ideas. It creates a sense that there is nothing inherently wrong with beliving these beliefs and deflects responsibility from both voters and supporters. Because the truth is that there inherent racism within right wing and conservative parties, and there is inherent individualism and selfishness within these parties that means they don’t believe they have to respond to pleas of social distancing and vaccines. All parties are not equal.
The Horse-Shoe Theory is popular in political discourse and suggests that the political left and right, rather than being opposite ends but rather the further extreme you go the more similar left and right become (curving around like a horse-shoe). But again, we see the presentation of both sides as equal, wehn fundamentally they are not. The far-right advocates for supremacy of one group, social inequality and often times blatanlty oppressive policies. Whereas the far-left believes in equality, both in treatment and conditions for all. And many people reading this may claim I am biased, or that I am mis-representing the side I disagree with. But in fact this is simply a product of the media industry we are surrounded by. Our media has made us believe that in order to be ‘neutral’ we need to look at the good sides of both parties. That we need to present them both equally. When neutrality is presenting the truth, regardless of how it makes each side look. I have criticisms of both the left and the right, but I can also acknowledge there is fundamental oppression and inequality within the political right, and that is what their policies are based on. False neturality is bias towards the side you are inadvertenlty defending. In order to make the right look good, the media represents them a specific way and involves them hiding a huge aspect of the foundating of the party.
I personally prefer to think of politics in regards to the political compass (as pictured above). It’s not perfect but it is more accurate than others. We see how being left does not equal being liberal, and how your political opinions are formed through axis, and shows the divisions with each side of the ‘spectruum’. Regardless I think it is counter-productive to focus on the categorisation of politics, and instead we should focus on how we criticse and present different parties. We cannot only think of the good aspects of what we believe and blindly defend it. Instead, in order to help our beliefs and policies grow and improve, we must learn to criticise. We must stary away from the human need to find a label, and blindly identify with a group of people. Ideologues end up in echo chambers and we never progress and never truly develop. Instead we should take an open approach, and use political ideologies as vehicles of learning and progress. Jumping on the train which best matches our morals until it takes us where we need to go, jump off and take the next one. There is no need to stick to one ideology, especially once you begin to disagree with it. There are many claims, especially from the authoritarian internet left, that if you criticse Communist leaders, you are a victim of propaganda and not a true ‘communist’ or ‘lefty’ when the reality is, the most intelligent people are able to criticse the very thing they support. We can’t simply criticse our enemy without reflecting on ourselves, otherwise we’ll never change.
It is a mistake to assume that we all believe the same things, and that “racism doesn’t need a devil’s advocate” or that we should “depoliticise human rights” because the very nature of these issues means that they will be counter-argued and that represents the ideologies and beliefs of those who disagree. This doesn’t excuse the people that believe this, however we cannot blind ourselves to that fact that people truly do believe it. And that we must begin to unteach this from them, and allow them to develop. we need to begin seeing the truth, because all sides of politics are different. Politics isn’t just the policies we want in practice, and it’s not simply who we vote for, rather it is the foundations of how we percieve society. It’s how we think people should be treated, it’s what we think about hierarchy, oppression and more. So when people hold opinions different to ours, its not irregardless of politics, but rather it’s part of their political opinion. We shouldn’t expect that we all have the same moral opinions and differ on policy, but rather we should treat them as something which go hand in hand. These issues are inherently political and to think otherwise is to misunderstand them, and to delay the education needed to change it.
