My reasons for aligning more with the Democratic Party are both lack of alignment with the Republican Party and alignment with the Democratic Party. I cannot deny part of the reason I am Left leaning has to do with what I do not like about the Right. Though it has been suggested I would be better off sticking with what I like about the Left, to do so would give an inadequate view of why I fall where I do.
While I will continue to compare both sides, I will attempt to present my considerations as fairly as I can.
For example, in my last article, I spoke of those on the Right who use their guns to threaten violence against the authority figures telling them to wear masks. This was a bit snarky on my part, and though I find this type of posturing dangerous, I recognize this stance is not embraced by many in the Republican Party. I will attempt to refrain from using examples of the radical Right in my examinations (as there is plenty of behavior on the radical Left I find equally appalling and I recognize that neither represent the masses). I may not do this perfectly, but I will do my best.
In my discussion below on social services I refer to “rock-bottom” and “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” because I have heard these concepts/phrases used by a wider range of Republicans than only those on the extreme Right. From my perspective, these concepts represent the perspective of a wider range of people on the Right (I hear far more people speak on these concepts than I have seen posting social media pictures of themselves with their guns at rally’s against COVID restrictions).
Please keep in mind that this is only one person’s perspective. I do not intend this to be a comprehensive look at these issues but rather a presentation of my rationales for standing where I do.
It is my belief, based on the information I have at present (as is the general case with beliefs), that trauma is a primary source of most our societal ills.
The correlation between child abuse or childhood trauma with poverty, mental illness, generational trauma, drug use, sexual promiscuity (inevitably leading to abortion increase), prison time, and a wide variety of physical illnesses is so strong it is alarming how little attention our country has given this issue.
Trauma expert Bessel Van Der Kolk, M.D. points out when a similarly strong correlation was found between smoking and lung disease, we attacked the issue so fiercely smoking rates soon dropped drastically.
Why have we not addressed the root causes of child abuse and childhood trauma with such veracity?
We tend to address the long-term symptoms of childhood trauma rather than the root causes, and we get frustrated when people do not get better. We want to put tighter restrictions on government aid programs because we are weary of people taking advantage of the system. We believe people are responsible for their own healing and that providing practical assistance robs them of the opportunity to help themselves.
Truly desiring to help people out of these living conditions, we want to restrict access to government aid, believing doing so will help people hit rock bottom and get the help they need. At first glance, this seems to make sense. We have been taught people need to hit rock bottom before they can change.
I wonder if this assumption is not based on confirmation bias.
Because this rock-bottom theory is true for isolated individuals, the assumption of those who changed their life after reaching their lowest point becomes “if I had to hit rock bottom to change, then so must everyone else” and we become convinced removing social supports from people will help them change. Even if this is not our personal story (it is not mine, for instance), if we hear this often enough from people in authority, we come to believe it.
It is my belief, however, only some people change when they hit an all-time low, and even for them, I believe they could have changed another way it another way had been available to them. Those who tend to turn their lives around after rock-bottom tend to be those with a high level of resiliency (which is developed in childhood).
Those without a high level of resiliency may hit rock bottom and remain there permanently.
Although the success rate for Alcohol Anonymous are not clear, figures put long-term sobriety for AA participants at somewhere between 5% and 25%. What is the difference between AA participants who remain sober and those who do not? Certainly, it is a complex question, but I would guess resiliency (along with quality social support structures, which is foundational to developing resiliency in the first place) is a strong factor.
We have a complex problem on our hands.
The cycles of trauma and abuse tend to be generational, and I do not believe we serve our community well by leaving people to hit an all-time low thinking that will propel them to healthy change. Most people who hit rock bottom simply are not equipped to make these healthy changes. I likewise do not see rock bottom as necessary for change. I think we need strong motivation to change, but I believe there are healthy motivators other than reaching the depths of despair.
I believe our complex problems begin to heal when we become aware that our trauma, along with much of our suffering, is not our fault.
The issues of shame, despair, and helplessness which accompany the “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” mentality do not generally help people get better. Being told your suffering is your own doing and if you only could do X,Y, and Z properly then everything would be better generally pushes people deeper into the shame cycle as they either fail again and again to do X,Y, and Z or they try X,Y, and Z and it does not work.
One example of this mentality creeps up regularly in the Christian community.
The idea is perpetuated that a good Christian reads their Bible and prays on a daily basis. While in and of themselves these activities are not problematic, the issue lies in the shame underneath this assumption. Shame says “if you are not reading your Bible and praying every day, that is your fault and you need to try harder” or “if your relationship with God is not as strong as you would like, examine your prayer and Bible reading habits and make the necessary changes.”
Another problem occurs when a person is suffering, reads their Bible and prays daily, and still suffers. Despair sets in when the activities they have been told will be a solution do not work as promised. It is easy to move next into “well, there must be something really broken with me” or "what is so wrong with me that this works for other people but not me?” Or what about those who “know” they are supposed to be reading their Bibles and praying but just cannot seem to do it? They are left with no choice but to see themselves as worthless failures.
“Pull yourself up by your bootstraps” Christianity does not work and neither does the “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” solution to society’s suffering. Even if it seems to work for isolated individuals, I see no evidence this works as a general principle.
I imagine the solution to seeing progress in healing the deep wounds and effects of trauma in our nation as multifaceted. Because this type of healing will not occur quickly, it is necessary to address these issues at both the symptom level and the root level.
Think of it as a bacterial infection.
We generally treat both the symptoms and the root of a bacterial infection. We take antibiotics to attack the bacteria itself and take medication to help alleviate the symptoms. We may take medication to help us sleep, understanding that good sleep helps the body heal. Or we may take pain medication to help us relax and let go of tension, which also helps us heal.
Or consider a child with a badly broken bone.
A badly broken bone must be set and placed in a cast so complete healing can take place. It would not do much good to simply provide painkillers to someone with a badly broken bone.
Now imagine, we get angry with the child because we have given them painkillers for their break, and they are not healing. Instead of taking them to the doctor to have the bone set and placed in a cast to heal, we take away their pain medication believing by doing so we are helping them hit rock bottom and forcing their bodies to heal.
Most of us can likely see this as a ridiculous scenario, but we do not think twice about treating traumatized individuals this way when we see them as “taking advantage of the system” or “lazy.”
It is my estimation, we must not only strengthen our programs which provide for the basic needs of individuals in extreme poverty, but also work to heal the root issues.
One massive root is childhood abuse and trauma.
We must strengthen and increase programs which provide aid and support to young families. We must strengthen and increase programs which help people heal from trauma and make good mental health services available for all. We must increase access to proactive and preventative mental health practices and services. We must make space for people to heal from their own traumas and help families and society provide a less traumatic base for each subsequent generation.
Access to high quality health care for all (both mental and physical), access to high quality education for all, reasonable living wages for all, and access to high quality childcare for all, are some places to start. One of the main pushbacks to this suggestion will inevitably be the cost of such programs. Some solutions to the cost issue could be increasing federal taxation percentages on the wealthy, closing tax loopholes, reallocating the funds taxes already bring in, and increasing the corporate tax rate.
It is my estimation that the wealthiest individuals and corporations in our country have inevitably taken advantage of others on the way to obtaining their wealth. Whether it be through the use of unethically sourced overseas labor, poor wages/work environments for workers in the United States, abuse of our environment, inhumane treatment of animals, manufacturing poor quality products requiring higher turnover in purchasing, manipulating people into believing they need items or services they cannot afford, taking advantage of the poor through unfair interest rates or by taking their homes, hiring mainly part-time employees to avoid paying full-time benefits, or something else, the wealthy often seem to step on the marginalized while they work their way up.
I therefore have no issues with asking the wealthiest in our country to shoulder this responsibility.
This may be a strong stance, and this may be an unpopular stance, but it is nevertheless where I stand. Since the Democratic Party tends to favor supportive social services programs such as I outlined above, and since the Republican Party tends to favor the rock-bottom/self-help approach, I find myself more aligned with the Democratic Party on this issue.
Commentaires