The End of Decency?

September was a busy month, in terms of cultural and political news. We had the death of Ruth Bader-Ginsberg and then the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, which is all but assured to end with her confirmation to the post. On September 29th, we had the first presidential debate. There was a lot to think about, and I don’t like to write until my thoughts begin to coalesce about an issue.

American Presidential Election Years almost always have a degree of de rigueur histrionics. If 2020 could win an Oscar for drama, I am certain that it would. Yet this September I thought was particularly revealing in terms of how badly the level of social discourse has deteriorated.

I rarely comment on President Trump. The very mention of his name, as most people know, provokes strong reactions. But I would like to make some observations, which I believe are valid. Most people I know who detest him (it never sees to be ‘mere’ dislike) lament how crass and arrogant he comes across. Most people I know who love Trump find his filterless, no-holds-barred style of communication to be a breath of fresh air, because he doesn’t speak or behave like a typical politician. It is an acceptable price to pay, according to that line of reasoning, if the President of the United States speaks more like a common person than a statesman. For decades the average western citizen has grown to despise the political caste, and one of those reasons is that the truth, that most precious of currencies, has been depreciated and defaced by politicians who regularly deceive and connive in order to attain their selfish ends. President Trump also has a tendency to play loose with facts. Some would simply be blunt enough to say that the man is a liar. But what most of his detractors don’t understand is that for supporters of Trump, even if he lies or says something ill-advised, there is not the sort of smug, self-satisfied disdain for ‘regular people’ in him that is readily perceived in other politicians. It is for this reason I believe that Trump’s broad engagement of working class people covers over a multitude of sins in the minds of his supporters. We may be the hoi polloi, but if we are going to have a functioning republic, we would like it if our ruling class did not so clearly despise us and our common traditions. This is one reason why the demonstrative manifestations of patriotism of which the President is so fond appeals to a lot of people. This is a man who really does seem to love his country; the Obama Administration, by contrast, seemed to take pains to apologize for and reduce American Hegemony.

All across the country, the reactions to the death of RBG were a real ideological Rorschach test. Liberals predictably mourned her as a champion of their most important causes. But what I found most interesting was that the conservative tributes were quite diverse. Some respectfully praised her accomplishments (after all, she wasn’t just an advocate of abortion and gay marriage) and her character, which was formidable. There is no doubt in my mind that she was a strong, tenacious and dignified woman. Having gone to her judgment, most people followed, knowingly or not, the old advice, de mortuis nil de malo. Speak no ill of the dead.

On the other hand, there were some conservatives who expressed consternation and even anger with their ideological allies that they would extend to RBG any sort of tribute beyond a pious and hopefully sincere promise to pray for her soul. RBG for them was (and this opinion I think does have some merit) the avatar of the liberal court as manifested after Roe v Wade, and was also directly to blame for the killing of millions of unborn children. In the face of such an atrocious legacy, they argue, it was unseemly at best, and evil at worst, to eulogize (in the literal sense) a person who so vociferously and unrepentantly was responsible for so much of the wickedness coming out of the highest court of our land.

RBG’s death really highlighted for me how deeply our cultural mores are shifting away from the old, genteel notions of humanitas: that is, treating everyone as much as possible in a gentle, kind and humane way.

It has been said before that we get the leaders we deserve. No more was this made so painfully clear for the nation than in the First Presidential Debate of this election cycle. By almost unanimous agreement, the debate on September 29th was the worst in American History and possibly even reached the level of national disgrace. If we pretended for a moment that Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden were not running for the Presidency, and we knew nothing of their politics, the spectacle of seeing two people essentially verbally brawl on national television was more worthy of Jerry Springer and other daytime melodramas than an engagement of the minds of voting citizens who wish to be informed about the current candidates for high office. It certainly wasn’t a serious discussion of policy and the political positions of our candidates. Nevertheless, what we saw did not surprise me at all. The Presidential Debate confirmed in my mind that we are sliding so far away from reason, charity, decency and class, that the putative leaders of our political institutions cannot control their own hatreds. We are becoming as emotionally incontinent as infants.

Let’s make no mistake: we are more and more becoming a crass, vulgar, ugly society. The rot has only now risen to the surface to be put on full display. Two old men yelling at each other, cutting each other off, making snide ad hominem attacks at each other’s family, the lurid and seedy insinuations of corruption, all of this should not surprise us, because it is the base behavioral level of much of social media. And now, with so much misinformation and disinformation circulating on the internet, we have the ultimate marriage of human ignorance and human malice.

Today, the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi, Pope Francis released his new encyclical Fratelli Tutti, which is broadly an appeal for human fraternity. John Allen today in Crux compares it to Papal attempts in the 20th century to avert what would eventually become the Second World War. Are we nearing a conflagration of that sort of scale? Only time will tell.

Without having read the entirety of Fratelli Tutti yet, I have to say that I am very pessimistic regarding appeals to high ideals like human fraternity, disconnected from the reality of human behavior. I have a more Augustinian take on unredeemed human nature: without grace, we are far more likely to behave like devils than angels. Talk of human fraternity from its very beginning is a concept taken from the Enlightenment and the ideals of the French Revolution. The same revolutionaries who proclaimed their commitment to equality, fraternity and liberty often tended to be zealous users of the guillotine. As the old, Liberal world order continues to die, appeals to ideals, without the moral qualities needed to manifest them in common life, ring increasingly hollow. I might also note, with some degree of sadness, that this Encyclical comes from the same person who is well-known to be singularly nasty to those whom he considers his enemies. We need to pray for him. It is no feat of virtue to show kindness and meekness when surrounded by friends. The true test of a person’s character is how they behave toward their enemies.

Our Lord Jesus has taught us to love our enemies and to pray for our persecutors. The same teaching is found in the Epistles, where we are enjoined to return curses with blessings, and to overcome evil with good. Our Lord’s words, as usual, get to the crux of the matter, which is the battle within the human heart. Our Lord does not give us mere high ideals, but concrete commands. He requires us to change, to be converted. In today’s world, Christians have a unique opportunity to visibly practice charity in everyday things. If we rightly despise the vulgarity of our culture, we must create the alternative. We complain in vein about the banality and vanity of our leaders, if we are vain and banal ourselves. What we call in common language “decency” is nothing more than learning how to treat others the way we want to be treated. Charity is not the mere toleration of our neighbor, but our willing and working for the good of each person we meet. This is the example of Our Lord and his Saints.