In The Human Condition, Hannah Arendt, a political theorist, writes that "It is by virtue of common sense that the other sense perceptions are known to disclose reality and are not merely felt as irritations of our nerves or resistance sensations of our bodies. A noticeable decrease in common sense in any given community and a noticeable increase in superstition and gullibility are therefore almost infallible signs of alienation from the world."
Just such a decrease in common sense and an increase in gullibility was seen in the Bush administration. Take, for instance, the Bush administration's stance on gay marriage. It was not based on anything but religion, which, in the political realm, is as good as superstition. This superstitious campaign was so successful that much support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in favor of an interpretation calling marriage a union between one man and one woman was gathered. Had the amendment been successful, it would have been nothing more than superstition fully embodied in the legal system. The very idea that this could have been successful is so preposterous that, clearly, something needs to change.
I do have to note something about Arendt's claim, however. What she calls "common sense" is simply a particular symbolic order allowing people to interpret their world - in that sense, "common sense" may not be common at all, especially in today's world. Last semester I wrote a paper (the main thrust of which will probably be posted on the Outlaw Politics page at some point) in which I claimed that a new symbolic order had arisen, consisting of a myriad of tribal, or subcultural, symbolic orders. Within them, people can communicate, and due to some common elements communication across symbolics is also possible. What superstition does, then, is further diffract these symbolic orders, so that it becomes harder to communicate across them.
This has caused a closing off of a truly public realm, one in which - as Arendt would say - the possibility of (political) action is possible. Arendt claims that "power is what keeps the public realm, the potential space of appearance between acting and speaking men, in existence." If this is the case, then contemporary politics doesn't really exist at all - speech and action have become so separate that power has disappeared, and with it the potential for political action. All that is left is speech, utilized in such a way that it is propaganda to keep the populace believing what is necessary until the system itself collapses into the vacuum created by just such a lack of power.
-the ambassador
