T-rav and I had a lively discussion last night concerning political, military, or religious titles and the respect that accompanies them (or should). If, for example, I were to meet the president of the US, I would be excited to have met the president regardless of whether I agreed with his/her politics; the office of president commands respect regardless of whether I really like the person. I may not fawn over the person if I think they're a schmuck, but I still respect what they've done to get themselves in such a respectable position.
A few years ago Dick Cheney came to speak at BYU for a graducation service. There were all sorts of protests and a group of crazy students (though crazy for other reasons and not just for this) even planned an "alternative commencement" with Ralph Nader for people who couldn't stomach the idea of listening to VP Cheney. I didn't understand all the hype. Had Cheney been a genocidal dictator, this would have been a natural reaction. But Cheney wasn't a bad guy (well maybe they thought so...). Maybe you hate his politics, but he's still the VP and it's kind of cool that BYU managed to get such an important person to speak at commencement. At least that's how I saw it. To me, the vice president, who also happened to be Cheney, would be speaking to BYU students. Since he wasn't coming to give a political speech, his political views were irrelevant to me.
T-rav, on the other hand, sees it the other way around. Although he didn't hate Cheney, he saw it more as Cheney, who happens to be VP, came to speak. Being excited or angry about him coming completely depended on how he felt about Cheney's politics. If he doesn't like the person or the politics, he won't be as excited to meet them. It doesn't matter if that person is president or king or prophet; T-rav respects the office if he also respects the person.
So which category do you fit into? And which do you think is more normal for Americans? Why?
12 comments:
I think I'm more in your camp, Kelly. Even if I didn't respect the individual for their political decisions, I would still hold some regard for the office (and what the person had done to get themselves into such a prestigious position).
This post has gotten me thinking about if one should respect a political office. Is it unpatriotic to disrespect the office of the president (if one doesn't respect the person)?
For what it's worth, I'm totally with T-rav. Our government is built on the idea that we can voice our dissent and disapproval for people in office as much as we like. The Vice-President (or any other elected official) really derives his authority from the people, and not by virtue of his position, so if the people don't like what someone is doing, they should say so.
And yes, the people who organized the alternative commencement did think Cheaney was a bad person.
So yeah, I'm with T-rav.
GermyB- but does voicing dissent = disrespecting the office? Can you respect the position someone holds while still despising the individual? I'm definitely not saying that people should keep quiet just because someone has authority. That kind of goes against everything America is built upon. But even if you loathed Obama, wouldn't you still be respectful of him if you met him in person?
I'm with you in situations like these, but there's more going on there than whether you like the speaker. Graduation is all about tradition and ceremony, and it doesn't really matter if you like it or not. I looked totally stupid in that hat, but the point was I was graduating and that's just what you do. Or you stay home and get over it.
I also HATED my graduation speaker (the college one) because he was more boring than any lecture I received during my whole university experience.
Sometimes things are not the way you like them, but you deal with it instead of being a turd. And as far as politics go, I think our country is shifting toward not having respect for offices no matter who is in them. Cecil is my homeboy? Bush is stupid? One Big-A Mistake, America? We talk about our leaders with much less respect than ever, sometimes even when we like them.
That said, I think there are some places where dissent should take a backseat to being a decent human being. You may hate a play, but you don't walk out because it would be disrespectful to the actors. You might disagree with a politician, but you express that in the way you vote or donate money, not by flipping him the bird in public, or, say, having an alternative graduation just to avoid hearing him talk.
I agree with you on this Kelly. There is an element of respect for the office of a person, whether or not you like that person, or even agree with them politically, religiously, etc.
An example:
If you were to meet the Pope, and you were not Catholic, how would you react to him? Hopefully out of respect for his office, be it that you think him a terrible person or no.
I feel that the protest against Cheaney was a stupid little indie, lets be argumentative because we can be, whine that did nothing to further unity between parties nor to encourage others to be more aware of different political views. (I feel free to say this having known about all of those involved with that incident.)
Bad person or no, the people put Cheaney in office, and although that doesn't mean we should just sit back and do nothing about political wrong doings, doing that "something" at a commencement ceremony is cheap and meaningless.
ixoj - yes, you can respect an office and disapprove of the person holding it. I argue that people voicing dissent about the behavior of a person holding a position that is supposed to be representing them is actually respecting the position more than the individual. If we really disrespected an office, then we wouldn't care so much about what the people holding the office were doing.
I think we're conflating dissent as the opposite of respect a little too much - they're not opposites. And, you're conflating an organized protest with meeting someone in person. Holding an alternative commencement because you don't wish to support your University for bringing someone whose policies and behavior you thoroughly disapprove of (not just to "avoid hearing him talk") is different than being disrespectful in person. If people were giving Cheaney the bird, or spitting in his face, then yes, that is disrespectful of both the person and the office, and downright indecent. But the alternative commencement was civil and decent, and an exercise of the people demonstrating their values and opinions, and their disapproval.
And, Phin, how can you say the alternative commencement did nothing to "encourage others to be more aware of different political views"? We're talking about it now, aren't we? Because of it, you are aware that there were enough people in the Utah County area to fill a stadium who were significantly opposed to supporting BYU's invitation to Cheaney to speak. That doesn't make you wonder why that many people feel that strongly about it? I think it drew immense attention to the issue. And as for "cheap and meaningless," it felt pretty incredibly meaningful to me. :) I suppose you would've rather that everyone just attended the regular commencement and swallowed their disapproval, and went on their merry way? That would've done a lot to encourage others to be more aware of different political views...
I've gotta get back to work... Darn you all for rustling my feathers... :)
I really hate Dick Cheney, but out of respect for the office, I probably would have attended. Similarly, I would have done so had it been George W. Bush.
However, I do agree with Germy's position that his power is derived from the people, and I do not think it would have been unpatriotic not to have attended.
Wow. I definitely wasn't intending to create such a discussion about Cheney...But what's done is done. All I really wanted to know was how you all felt about respecting public figures as a person vs the office... ;)
And germy I think you make a good point about how expressing dissent actually honors the office. Next time I'll pick a less controversial example!
I can respect the office more than I respect the officer. I guess there is a fine line between the two, especially when folks project only their disrespect for the officer. To me, there's little point in Grumbling along the way. Do something about it when there's an opportunity to make a change, but until then, I think we should stick with being constructive.
I agree with Germy B. I'd say about 100%.
Also, I graduated in December at BYU and again at Georgetown and come April it was not important or worthwhile me to attend the commencement services. I really don't care who was speaking, no disrespect intended toward anyone. BTW, according to my google search, looks like Georgetown's line up that year included a previous foreign minster for Spain, a Nobel Prize winner, a past senator, the president of UMD, the president of Inter-American Development Bank, a PBS editor for the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer and Washington Week, a Pulitzer prize winner, various military leaders, and a bunch of other fancy folks. How's that for a line up?
And for the record, I do believe Cheney to be a bad, bad man.
Post a Comment