In two days, Americans will decide the outcome of one of the most controversial and divisive elections in our history. Many citizens of countries outside the United States are watching to see what fate may befall our nation, anticipating the impact that will be felt worldwide as we elect a new president. I have said little publicly about the election, about my vote (which was cast 2 weeks ago), or the candidates, good or bad. I have done my part to educate myself, to evaluate my values, and to prayerfully consider my responsibility. I have tried to advise those who asked privately to focus on policy, on party direction, on personal values, rather than on candidate’s flaws. Over the last few days, however, I have begun to feel a need to speak up. My thoughts are not meant to sway you in a certain direction, but to prompt you to think about the gravity of the situation preceding November 8 and then in the days, weeks, and months that will follow that date.
As I observe the two primary candidates who are bitterly opposed to each other and to their respective polarizing policies, I find myself considering our present situation in light of history. I am a perpetual learner, and have been focused during the last several months on historical literature in the time periods from 1915-1945, including the Russian Revolution, the World Wars, the Nazi regime and the Holocaust. Most recently, I completed One Day in the Life Of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Animal Farm by George Orwell. Both books explore Russia during the times of the Revolution and subsequent years afterward, including the Gulags (Russian labor camps), and the rule of Joseph Stalin. To be clear, I am not comparing our presidential candidates to any of these leaders. I am simply suggesting that we look at how leaders affected the course of countries in a relatively short period of 30 years. There is currently a power struggle, and a battle for the direction our country will take over the next 4 and possibly the next 30 years.
Comprehensive national change (both positive and negative) does not occur in a day, but comes with systematic adjustments over extended periods of time. Each choice that we make as individuals and as nations leads the way to either opportunity or oppression. The most astute leaders understand that redirecting a mass of people must be done slowly and deliberately, where the sense of the revolution (as in turning a large ship) is barely perceptible to those who are affected. As Christians, I believe it is our duty to be informed both historically and currently, as well as to be sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit in our own sphere of influence. We can not be passive, nor can we be silent.
First, there was a progressive loss of freedoms. In the allegory, the animals, after revolting against the humans who lorded over them, gradually give away (by passivity) their newly gained freedoms, falsely believing that they are better off than they were in the past, even as their suffering grows. The way in which this was achieved is striking. The basic laws and principles that governed their society after the revolution were slowly and systematically redefined. The once absolute rights and laws were gradually reinterpreted and then rewritten. By the end, there was no connection at all to the farm that once was and the one it had become. In my opinion, this is one of the most essential of issues we must consider when casting a vote for a candidate: how that person will value and uphold the principles and ideals that were central to the creation and inception of our country, including the freedoms that we hold most dear.
Several relevant ideologies were highlighted to me in Animal Farm. First, there was a progressive loss of freedoms. In the allegory, the animals, after revolting against the humans who lorded over them, gradually give away (by passivity) their newly gained freedoms, falsely believing that they are better off than they were in the past, even as their suffering grows. The way in which this was achieved is striking. The basic laws and principles that governed their society after the revolution were slowly and systematically redefined. The once absolute rights and laws were gradually reinterpreted and then rewritten. By the end, there was no connection at all to the farm that once was and the one it had become. In my opinion, this is one of the most essential of issues we must consider when casting a vote for a candidate: how that person will value and uphold the principles and ideals that were central to the creation and inception of our country, including the freedoms that we hold most dear.
One truth I find most poignant, highlighted both in the Bible, in our constitution, and in the book Animal Farm is the fundamental right to life of a human being. Orwell writes of the animalism 6th commandment that ‘No animal shall kill any other animal,’ following the crux of the 6th Commandment of the Bible, “Thou shalt not kill.” By the end of the book, the commandment had been re-written to read ‘No animal shall kill any other animal without cause,‘ creating a vast array of interpretive space for what would be justifiable ’cause.’ I sense we are progressively allowing our own laws and principles to be amended beyond what was originally intended.
You might ask yourself, how can this happen, when we freely choose our leaders, and many times they enjoy large support along the way? How can such dramatic changes occur as happened during the early to mid-1900s, and what do we stand to learn from these atrocities?
I believe that we walk in a perilous place when we cease to think and reason for ourselves. We allow the media an overly influential place in our thoughts. We do not logically determine our direction. We become emotional in our decisions rather than systematic. We allow personal offenses to detract from our ability to devise purposeful solutions.
Secondly, when inconsistencies present themselves and there is a vacuum of straightforward thought, many citizens simple choose to be silent. We ignore our warnings, we stand on the sidelines, we believe that someone else will fill the gap. In doing so, we have handed over another freedom, the right to speak our minds.
Thankfully, I can write these words without fear of being arrested. The worst that could happen to me is to lose a few friends on social media or perhaps be publicly criticized. Solzhenitsyn could not speak freely in Russia, and he spent 8 years in a forced labor camp because he criticized Stalin (some accounts state that he simply expressed politically careless statements) in a personal correspondence. Though he received the Nobel Prize for Literature, he was soon thereafter arrested for treason and exiled from his country for writing of his experiences in the Soviet labor camps.