COMMENTARY: When our politics turns apocalyptic, we all lose
The assassination attempt on Donald Trump was terrible and a stain on our republic. In our government, “we the people” are responsible for choosing our leaders. No individual has the right to take that away.
But as wrong as the assassination attempt was (and it was wrong), it is essential to keep perspective. Trump’s vision for America does not become better as a result of him being a victim of violence. Nothing has changed about this election.
Many Trump supporters see things differently. Trump responded to this attack with defiance — a fist raised in the air — and this has inspired his followers.
Being inspired is fine, but many have begun to view the attack on him in religious terms. Only God could have saved him from the shooter. Trump is now seen by many as a great warrior against the forces of evil. However, there is a real danger in viewing a candidate as a martyr to a cause. This can blind one to what might seem to be the more mundane facts of a candidate’s political record and goals. But these things will matter to us all in the long run.
It makes no real sense to award someone a status far beyond their actual worth. A person’s life goals do not become better or more significant just because they are attacked. The essence of a person and what they stand for does not change. Transforming a human being into a symbol — sometimes even giving a person semi-divine status — speaks to the passion of their followers more than it does to the person who has suffered the attack. One of the delegates to the Republican convention said that Trump is “godlike.”
This is the danger that the assassination attempt presents, that people will view Trump more as a symbol than a real person and abandon the critical thinking that all of us should employ in trying to decide how to vote. Trump has strengths and weaknesses, as all of us do. His followers should beware of the temptation to see him differently. Good citizenship demands that we all think clearly about candidates — all of them.
The fact that Trump’s followers have begun to endow him with almost divine powers since the attack is related to their increasing tendency to see politics in apocalyptic terms. For them, the election is not normal in any sense of the word. They see this election as a grand battle between good and evil, with the future of the country and the world at stake. From their perspective, the government is on the verge of destruction, and only one man can save them.
As Marjorie Taylor Green said, “The Democrat(ic) Party is flat-out evil, and yesterday they tried to murder President Trump.”
Trump has done nothing to disabuse his followers of this; he has encouraged it. He often proclaims that our country is on the verge of collapse caused by “enemies of the people.” As he said in New Hampshire in 2023, “We will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.”
When the country is engaged in the final battle between good and evil, one cannot forgive those who pose a threat. Trump becomes “retribution” itself.
The apocalyptic vision, when it appears on the right or the left, encourages extremism. It denigrates the very idea of moderation. If the battle before us is one between pure good and pure evil, then moderation makes no sense. In fact, it is unpatriotic. And the same is true for the idea of compromise, which comes to be seen as a betrayal of everything good and decent. Only traitors compromise with evil. But once we reject moderation and compromise, we have essentially abandoned politics itself, which is defined by moderation and compromise by its very nature.
Those who oppose Trump for the presidency shouldn’t demonize him, but his supporters shouldn’t deify him. Our political life suffers when we see it in apocalyptic terms. Our presidential candidates are mere humans and should be judged as such. The best way to avoid a real apocalypse is to recognize the importance of moderation and compromise in politics and exercise our responsibility as citizens to think before we vote.
Solomon D. Stevens is the author of “Religion, Politics, and the Law” (co-authored with Peter Schotten) and “Challenges to Peace in the Middle East.” He wrote this for InsideSources.com.