FOR POLITICIANS, posturing is just one aspect of the political game. But one must wonder if they indeed feel as silly as they sometimes look and sound. Who's putting these buzz-phrases in their mouths, anyway? It would seem that their speechwriters are having a field day with some of this stuff -- it often resembles a comedian's material much more than what we'd expect of a political address. If an appearance of legitimacy is what our politicians desire, perhaps they should watch their language.
On Sunday, German voters faced a situation similar to that of the United States last November. The majority of votes were split between two parties -- a close enough call that both the Christian Democrats' leader, Angela Merkel, and the current chancellor and Social Democrat Gerhard Schroeder, claimed victory. We're expected to know the final results of the election early this week, but until then, Germans should prepare to hear a great deal of political rhetoric from both sides.
As expected, the situation has already generated some entertaining quotes from both Merkel and Schroeder. Consider this statement made by Merkel after hearing the projections on Sunday afternoon, which showed her party ahead by less than one percent -- a slim margin, if anything: "We are the strongest party and have the responsibility for forming the next government." While we might allow Merkel the second half of her remark, the "strongest party" comment is laughable. Bearing in mind that neither the CDU nor the SPD commanded even close to a majority of the popular vote, each hovering around 35 percent, Merkel's statement sounds a bit overconfident and even ridiculous to the intelligent listener.
Schroeder didn't fare much better himself. It's almost as if he's been taking lessons from President Bush's speechwriters: "I feel I have a mandate to ensure that in the next four years there will be a stable government in our country under my leadership." A mandate? Really? Because the last time I checked -- November 2004, in fact -- 35 percent did not come close to constituting a numerical majority, let alone a popular mandate.
So why do politicians posture so much in the first place? It appears that they are motivated by a desire to save face in the midst of defeat. Rhetoric can prove extraordinarily handy in such cases. But while it may serve their short-term purposes, this abuse of language can actually work to undermine a politician's authority in the long run. For instance, the amount of attention which Bush has received for his outlandish comments -- this being part of that collection -- is absurd in itself. But it does suggest that he realizes his lack of broad support.
Case in point: only two days after the 2004 election, while the entire nation waited for Ohio to return results, Bush remarked, "Let me put it to you this way: I earned capital in the campaign -- political capital -- and I intend to spend it." Perhaps Bush did earn more "political capital," with barely over half the popular vote, than either Merkel or Schroeder have. But his claim to legitimacy might have been stronger if he hadn't constantly reiterated it, especially while the verdict on Ohio was still out. Bush himself had said, only a few days earlier, that: "A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander-in-chief."
The point here is not simply to poke fun at Bush, Schroeder or Merkel, though. More broadly, it is to highlight a significant crisis faced by democratic governments throughout the world: There is no longer even a pretense of support for our own nations, policies or leaders. As beacons of democracy, we must ask ourselves why this confidence has been steadily eroded.
It's true that low approval ratings and the negative attention received by our political leaders and institutions are given more significance because of the ever-intense focus of the news media on politics. While it's unlikely that you'll ever read a quote from Franklin Roosevelt concerning the political capital he spent by introducing New Deal policies, this may simply be attributed to the absence of a 24-hour news establishment which charted his every blink and repeated them to the world.
Even so, it is apparent that we appreciate our leaders' genuine confidence rather than purely rhetorical mumbo-jumbo. A suggestion, then, for politicians: Don't stand in front of us and wax about the mandate we've given you or the political capital that we've invested in you. We all recognize that, for some reason or another, we're not united behind a common candidate or cause. Perhaps it would be more effective for politicians to stand on platforms which can actually garner the majority's support than to pretend they already have it. But maybe somebody should tell their speechwriters that, instead.
Todd Rosenbaum's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at trosenbaum@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: The future of Virginia is on the ballot this fall
By Ryan Williams | YesterdayHence, voters must make it their top priority to think critically and closely as they decide who their ballot will support this fall.
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | 3 days agoStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 4 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
