By Jonah Goldberg
Friday, December 08, 2017
It’s a cold and rainy morning here in Charleston, S.C.
I’m in my tenebrous hotel room awaiting dawn, or at least the gloaming of false
dawn and the promise of coffee it will bring.
I don’t mean to sound gloomy. I’m actually quite chipper.
But that’s because I’m spending the weekend with the Fair Jessica eating
Charleston’s finest fare — so what is there to complain about? Last night, I
had fried chicken skins and pimiento cheese, while drinking a martini at Husk.
How bad could life be?
In that sense, I feel a bit like that stock character in Godzilla and various disaster movies
who’s oblivious to the calamities around him. I’m not quite like Walter Matthau
in Earthquake — so drunk he doesn’t
notice the world falling down around him — but hey, the day is young.
I’m Not Your
Strawman, Buttercup
I bring this up for a couple reasons. First, because
every day, as I inchworm-spelunk through my Twitter mentions like Andy Dufresne
leaving Shawshank prison, I hear from people — and algorithms pretending to be
people — about how miserable, sad, regretful, and “butthurt” I am for this,
that, or the other thing going on in Washington.
For years, this kind of thing came at me overwhelmingly
from the Left. These days it comes at me mostly from “the Right” or, to be more
specific, from the MAGA/Bannon swamps. And it’s just weird to me. Sure, I have
my good days and bad, like everyone else. You know, like when you wake up in
the camping section of a Walmart in a strange town, covered in blood not your
own (“You didn’t specify whether that’s a good day or a bad one.” — The Couch).
My point is that politics isn’t life — or, at least, it
shouldn’t be. I used to think when I got this kind of grief from the Left that
it was evidence that the progressives take politics way too seriously. If
you’re heartbroken whenever your “team” loses, then your “enemies” must feel
the same way when they lose.
In other words, it’s a kind of projection — the
assumption that someone else’s emotional state mirrors your own. This dynamic
doesn’t quite fit the textbook definition of projection because, at least as I
understand it, Freud thought projection was a kind of denial. A bigot accuses
others of being the real bigots to conceal his own bigotry, or something like
that.
The difference with so many of the people I hear from is
that they aren’t denying anything. Because they think politics is everything,
they assume I must think so, too. I don’t. The whole point of being a
conservative and — I would argue — an American is to see politics as only a
fraction of one’s life.
Just Say No to
One-Thingism
Which brings me to the second reason. In this week’s Remnant podcast, I had a wide-ranging
conversation with one of my favorite people, Steve Hayward. At the very end, we
started giving advice to youngn’s just starting their careers. We even raised
the idea of doing a whole show on life advice for young politicos, or young
conservatives, or carbon-based life forms (we didn’t really nail it down). But
the subject has been on my mind a bit since we recorded the podcast.
So, as I prepare to enjoy a vacation weekend away from
politics, here’s some advice: Don’t invest that much of your soul in politics.
In fact, don’t invest your whole soul in anything.
Now, if you want to be an Olympic wrestler or the world’s
best competitive eater, this isn’t necessarily great advice. But if you want to
be a happy and relatively successful person over the course of your whole life,
you need to diversify your portfolio. A few years ago, I wrote about this at
length in a G-File titled “Love Isn’t All You Need” (back when it only came out
in email, so no link, alas). In it, I railed against “one-thingism” — the idea,
promulgated by Curly in City Slickers,
that you should find that one thing in life and dedicate yourself to it.
This is horrible, terrible, no-good advice. Just because
it comes from Curly doesn’t mean it’s not the philosophy of zealots, stalkers,
radicals, terrorists, and extremists of all stripes.
Put aside the complicated question of religion for a
moment. No thing in your life should be your everything: no cause, no business,
no movement, no institution. Likewise, you shouldn’t make any person your only
reason to get out of bed in the morning. You won’t be doing your child or
spouse any favors if you do that. Indeed, your smothering will likely lead to a
maladjusted kid or a spouse who loses respect for you or perhaps seeks a restraining
order. Unwavering love is great. Unwavering attention or obsession: terrible.
The simple fact is that in this fallen and flawed world,
putting all of your chips on a single thing or person is an invitation for
massive disappointment or, simply, a wasted life. First of all, when you give
all of your soul to something, it can become a kind of enslavement. You forfeit
your own agency, and your loyalty is no longer seen as something that the
object of your love needs to earn. For Luca Brasi, the Corleone family is his
One Thing, and that makes him a golem.
If you think X is already deserving of your whole soul,
it becomes difficult to imagine being outside X. And, as a result, you lose the
critical distance necessary to offer constructive criticism. This is why too
much devotion is destructive in politics and society generally. Instead of
being a force for improvement, you’re taken for granted as a loyal foot
soldier, booster, or cheerleader. For the one-thingist — the Communist,
Fascist, Jihadist, or, less dramatically, the college-football booster, the
crazy fanboy, or some other tribalist thinker — if the object of your devotion
can do no wrong, then you will never be an advocate for improvement, you’ll be
a reliable apologist for the worst actions of your cause.
It is a hallmark of a modern and free society that you
can divide up your loyalties and passions. It’s only when you’re in a
life-or-death struggle that one-thingism makes any sense. In a zombie
apocalypse, keeping your children or spouse alive is an acceptable One Thing.
In a totalitarian regime, revolution could be an acceptable One Thing. But in a
free and prosperous society, the route to real meaning and happiness is Many
Things.
Even in religion, I think one-thingism is best avoided. I
know Abraham was asked to put God before his own child, but that didn’t mean
Abraham didn’t love Isaac. One of Christianity’s greatest contributions to
Western civilization was to create the space for multiple loyalties. Jesus says
we must render unto Caesar — but only what is Caesar’s. St. Augustine divides
the world into the City of Man and the City of God — a division that wasn’t
geographic but spiritual and psychological. Protestantism accelerated this
trend in countless ways (wait for my book).
As a matter of a life well-lived, I think it’s admirable
and good to be informed by your faith in all of your endeavors. But some
endeavors needn’t be seen through the prism of religious one-thingism. The man
of God and the atheist alike can love college football or be comrades on a
bowling team.
More Eggs,
Different Baskets
It’s a bit of a cliché to say that nobody ever said on
their deathbed, “I wish I spent more time at the office” or, “I spent too much
time with my kids.” And that’s good advice. If you’re organizing your life
around how you want to be remembered when you die, you should think more about
your eulogy than your résumé. I’ve been to memorial services where speakers
share stories about a great career, but share little to nothing about being a
great father, mother, wife, husband, or friend. I find it heartbreaking.
But the key to a rich and healthy life is not putting all
your eggs in a single basket. Find the two, three, or five baskets that give
you meaning and hold them tight. But give new baskets a try from time to time.
As a gross generalization, I think women understand this
better than men. In part because even successful professional women tend to be
the primary parent for their kids, women understand intimately the tradeoffs
between competing devotions. In my experience, women have more hobbies than men,
too. And they’re better at engaging in civil society, from school fundraisers
to neighborhood associations to informal groups of friends. Men, particularly
successful ones, are more likely to throw themselves into their work to the
exclusion of other important things. Then, six months after retirement, they
discover that playing golf all the time is boring, and they get miserable or
sick or drunk or bat-guano crazy about politics.
You Asked for This
Speaking of bat-guano crazy politics, let me change gears.
Last year, Kevin Williamson wrote a post in the Corner titled “Remember,
You Asked for This.” It was about the decision to nominate Donald Trump.
Well, I want to offer something similar. Right now, it
looks like Roy Moore will be elected the next senator from Alabama. Because
Donald Trump endorsed him, the Republican National Committee is once again
helping to fund Moore’s campaign, and Steve Bannon is praising him as a man of
great integrity while denigrating Mitt Romney, a mensch who flushes more integrity
down the toilet every morning than Bannon has displayed since becoming a
blood-and-soil Jeremiah.
You can forget the sexual allegations against Moore —
though you can be sure no one else will, because the Democrats and the media
will be reminding voters about it constantly. Forget the fact that Moore is a
grifter and huckster who claims America
is evil and had
9/11 coming but that we were great when
slavery was legal. Put aside all the arguments about how “we” need his vote
or that Republicans shouldn’t unilaterally disarm.
The simple fact is this guy, if elected, will be a
disaster for Trump, conservatives, and the GOP alike — even if he votes in
partisan lockstep with the Trump agenda. The mere act of him voting for good
legislation will make it harder for some senators to vote for it. Moore will
say stupid, offensive, and bigoted things — and every Republican, starting with
Trump himself, will be asked to respond.
Moore voters in Alabama, of course, will deserve much of
the blame, but so will a large coalition of national Republicans — starting
with Donald Trump — as well as cable-news and talk-radio boosters and
rationalizers, and of course Bannon himself, who let this world-historic
cock-up happen based on a potted theory that Mitch McConnell is an enemy or
that you can build a “nationalist” movement around a credibly accused child
molester and theocratic bigot and constitutional illiterate.
In short, you asked for this. You know who you are, and
if you don’t, you should prepare to be reminded in the months to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment