The Politics of Irrelevance.

Tags

2 party state, America, American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, Democracy, democratic reform, foreign policy, Gay Marriage, Liberalism, media, politics, politics of irrelevance, punch and judy, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, relevant, same sex marriage, United States

Gay marriage has been legalised in all 50 states of America. Jubilation is conquering the social networks. Celebrities are popping open extra bottles of champagne. The religious and conservative are bemoaning the imminent destruction of the country, if not the world.

My view? None of this matters… and that was always the point.

Gay marriage is part of the politics of irrelevance (POI), a very deliberate side-show performed in democratic countries to distract voters from a lack of real choice.

In America, the POI usually concerns things like flag-burning laws, school meals, the death penalty debate, prayer in schools and cannabis law reform.

Airy and light topics like these are easy to speak passionately about. It is easy and respectable to take a different side on any of these matters to your core electorate, even to your best friend or partner.

By contrast, real politics, real life and death issues – China, immigration, foreign policy, Islam etc… – are more difficult for the actors in a phoney democracy to speak freely about.

Since politicians in the West want to get elected more than anything else, they won’t lay out a concrete position on substantial issues for fear of diminishing their vote. Instead, they will practice a very developed (almost artisan) kind of hypnosis – dancing a merry dance around the subject and climaxing with a very vague (but complete sounding) answer.

America would change dramatically if the politics of irrelevance was no longer an option. Politicians would then be forced to take a stand on real, flesh and blood topics. Career politicians would be weeded out almost immediately. The mind-numbing centrism of the modern US would give way to a sharp divide, providing the people with genuine choice.

There is a reason Fox news and MSNBC exist. In Britain, we call it ‘Punch and Judy politics’ (Punch and Judy are the titular characters of a traditional puppet show – popular in English seaside towns – in which each character beats the other with a stick). The kind of politics so loudly combative and dumbed down that everyone can understand it – everyone except the genuinely informed. Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity are not real journalists. They are cartoon characters – Mrs Liberal and Mr Conservative, and they fight exclusively about the irrelevant.

But what happens when the irrelevant can no longer be made to seem relevant? We may soon find out.

Gay marriage has now gone. Flag burning legislation was worn out years ago. Cannabis is being steadily legalised… The authentic is primed for a comeback, and that could be explosive.

The long sleep of the real has provided protective cover to profound failures of government. It has deadened the limbs of the libertarian majority, who when woken may throw off the establishment, both right and left. Phoney politics has postponed argument over the relationship between Islam and Islamist terrorism, the increasing use of the Spanish language in a traditionally English-speaking nation, government surveillance of law-abiding citizens, suicide rates among army veterans, the Mexicanisation of the pacific South-West, the national debt, trade imbalances with China and India, and a whole variety of real, consequential topics.

American politics is due for a makeover.

D, LDN.

Gay Marriage in Saudi Arabia: Prospects and Obstacles.

Tags

Ann Coulter, BBC, Defend the modern world, Executions, Fox, Gay Marriage, Gay Rights, Gulf, Inside the Kingdom, Jeddah, Muddy Waters, Persian Gulf, Princess, Redeye, Religion, Right is Right, Riyadh, Riyahd, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Kingdom

As I write, the passage of the Gay Marriage bill in Saudi Arabia still hangs tensely in the balance. Opposition from the religious establishment shows no sign of relenting with peaceful protests held overnight in Jeddah and Riyadh.

Meanwhile, supporters of the bill have delivered a petition with over a million signatures to the office of domestic affairs in Jeddah. The government has promised to consider both sides carefully.

Divisions between the two sides have been civil but impassioned and both feel strongly that they are on the brink of triumph.

Abu-Majid, a prominent advocate of gay liberties and executive of Saudi Gay Empowerment Committee (SGEC), said to reporters:

“This is obviously very tense. It’s also hugely exciting. The vote could go either way but I have faith it will be in the right direction: Forward. This is a chance to show the world the true progressive spirit of the Saudi people. Our values can help to lead the world.”

Meanwhile, across the ideological barricades, Sheikh Mohammad Sulayyil claimed his camp was the better placed to succeed.

“We represent the conservative majority in this country” he said “.. the silent majority, who oppose the desecration of marriage but are too polite to make their voices heard. We are a progressive, friendly society, but this is one step too far.”

Asked whether he harboured any hostility toward homosexuals (a frequent allegation by the SGEC), Sulayyil responded resolutely; “Of course we don’t. You cannot hate anyone in Islam. We love and care for homosexuals. We wish only that they respect our believes as well as their own.”

Despite observers predicting a close result, the ‘yes’ faction has easily been the most high-profile to date, with celebrities from throughout the Kingdom lining up to demonstrate their support for the bill. The 30 year old Lesbian actress Aafreeda Aftab has spoken at rallies up and down the country, accompanied by such LGBT superstars as Mohammad Badaidah, Abdul Laqiya and Osama Bin Haroum.

Some events in support of the bill have more dramatic than others. Laqiya and Haroum courted controversy by French-kissing in Medina during the Hajj season. Some clerics deemed this to be inappropriate behaviour and letters of complaint were written to various elected officials. Both actors may face a small fine if officials concur with the motion.

Within religious circles the debate has been particularly profound, with liberal and female imams taking a cautious stand in favour of tolerance and hard-line clerics stating frank opposition.

One thing is clear. Whichever way the result goes, the bill threatens to redefine the traditional identity of this gilded Kingdom and cause waves through the settled political landscape.

D, LDN

(That my satire here is almost see-through exposes how alien the Saudi world is to the one we inhabit).