Sunday, July 29, 2012

Welcome to the 45th iteration of the presidential election ritual.

1.4.3

     Few non-religious social process contain as much ritualized activity as the political process. It would seem as soon as one election ends we are already moving in to the next by way of the same cycle of events. Here too, in the political process and in the media surrounding it, a myriad of stereotypes emerge about the participants, the process, and the media themselves.

    Steven Lukes, in an article titled “Political Ritual and Social Integration”, posted in the Journal of Sociology, links rituals with set rules and symbolism. He suggests that these rituals are what hold a society together. In studying the history of political and social mores; from the official ceremonies like an inauguration, the campaign speeches, parades, and even the way a society reacts and mourns after an assassination, that these rituals draw the public attention and drives public loyalties – even if those loyalties polarize biases held against differing beliefs. Consider the differences between the political parties and how this divide might be more visible during certain rituals, like the party conventions.

     So many of the steps in our political process are ritualized, from the formal statement of eligibility based on our Constitution, the way candidates campaign, to how the winner will do his or her job. On the campaign trail we are used to the visits and speeches, with candidates kissing babies and making promises. Each state has a different ritual to decide its primary elections, whether a vote or caucus, and the conventions cap the primary season by celebrating the values of each party. Our citizens proudly visit the polls on Tuesday after the first Monday in November for the general election and the presidential winner stars planning the elaborate Inauguration parties for January. Each year too, we have the State of the Union Address, and similar events in the states and cities across America.

      Stereotypes can be defined as focus on obvious characteristics of a group, whether real or imagined but certainly don’t generally apply to the whole group, that can be good or bad, but most often are used to detract. In American politics the most frequently used stereotype is the assignment of political parties – either the socialist-leaning, tree-hugging, baby-killing liberal Democratic left, or the heartless, gun-loving, religious nut capitalistic conservative Republican right.

     Many stereotypes can relate to the voters and to the media that report and comment on the political process. Younger voters, who typically do not read newspapers or watch mainstream news are seen as uninformed and naive, while the mainstream news media is characterized as displaying elections more like sports contests such as a horse race, and that they focus more on the campaign strategies more than the actual issues the candidates represent, in effect parroting the campaign promises without an real substance creating a general public ignorance of the political process.

     Those folks who aren’t watching the news networks are shown to be watching comedy and political satire shows like Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show”, or NBC’s “Saturday Night Live”. These shows are stereotyped as fake and unreal, but studies show that they can provide quality political information, oftentimes more detailed and focused than the mainstream news, and that viewers can be more likely to be aware of the political issues and the candidates’ stands.

     There are many facets to the political process in this country—those we ritually participate in or celebrate and those we create generalities about. I personally try to keep an open mind and not fall in the bias and polarization of the parties but view both sides as completely as I can to make an informed decision. I do enjoy the rules and symbolism of casting my vote, and of the formal ceremonies.

     So many others rely on the media to provide the context of the rites we share, and to help them decide between the alternatives. With this type of apathy, at least there are outlets that combine satire and commentary and provide the viewers with the real issues, even if they aren’t aware they are learning while they laugh, against the stereotype of being fake.

No comments:

Post a Comment