Dividing Lines: When politics comes between friends
The three most controversial things in life are politics, religion and football.
Fortunately, I don’t give a damn about football. Rather than getting shot from both sides, I’m able to avoid tribal warfare in that respect.
When it comes to religion, I’m an Existentialist (Or rather Absurdist, if you want to get into it), which is a fancy intellectual way of saying that I’m a certain type of Atheist. As for Politics, it’s fairly obvious where I stand on that matter, as a member of the Labour Party and the Fabian Society.
The difference is that when I talk to friends of a different religious persuasion we find it a lot easier to “agree to disagree”. I walk away thinking they were horribly misguided as a child but are nonetheless trying to do the right thing, and they think I’m going to a land of fire and goblins. Two sides to every coin.
Politics is not so easy, perhaps because the playing field is level. I have tried the argument “Gordon moves in mysterious ways” but it doesn’t always work.
I have a lot of Labour friends and undecided-but-interested friends, I even have a few Tory pals (admittedly I can’t think of any specifically) and a couple of Lib Dems too.
Although I’ve made a lot of friends through politics, I’ve also lost a few. Mostly the rich-kids from high school who complained about Daddy having to sell her favourite pony due to the 50p tax rate (true story) but one or two have really disappointed me.
I’ll say now that he used to read this blog; whether he still does I don’t know. I don’t want to know, and I hope he doesn’t leave a comment on this post. If he does, I will read it, but it will never see outside of the spam folder.
Start playing your violin, this could get heavy. This story is personal but I don’t want it to just be a sob story; I hope it can serve as a cautionary tale about how not to do Politics. It’s an example of how people can become so obsessed with what divides instead of what unites to such a self-destructive extent.
I was best friends with a gent in high school, right from the age of 10 through to 18 we were practically a double act. Not only were we roommates right the way through, but we even in the same classes together. French and Spanish A-levels were just him, me and the teacher.
I recall one morning our teacher saying “I hope I don’t hear in a few years that you two fall out or secretly hated each other all this time!”
How prophetic he turned out to be.
At the end of A-levels my friend and I went our separate ways, I headed down south to Bath and he stayed north. I wasn’t involved in the Labour Party or politics in general until then; interested, but not committed.
Various Tories will know I’m a pretty good sport about politics, in that I have a sense of humour and am not completely defined by the media portrayal of my party.
Anyway, over the course of a year, I conversed with this friend over MSN every now and then. I’ve never had a more surreal experience than watching my best friend turn into a closet-BNP supporter. He actually joined UKIP but it felt a lot more sinister than that. It felt a lot like Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith where Obi-Wan Kenobi is shouting to Anakin about how he murdered little children, you know the scene.
Our conversations became more and more dominated by our ever increasing political divide. As time wore on I became more and more disappointed, ashamed and convinced he was a lost cause.
Imagine your best childhood friend told you this:
You deserve to drown in your own blood for supporting Labour.
After the abuse continued, I decided that there was nothing that could be salvaged from our friendship except perhaps this blog post and a collection of wistful anecdotes. The good man who was my best friend ceased to exist. So I told him after he started yet another ill-informed rant:
You’re boring me. In fact, you bore me every night. I try and listen, I try and humour you, I try and appreciate your views, sometimes I even try to find ONE constructive idea; but it’s empty. It’s hollow and empty and I’m fed up with it. I’ve been patient for so long, but it’s run out now.
So I’m going to ask you, never talk to me again about your views on Labour, or just never talk to me again.
We haven’t spoken since.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:53 am
[...] This post was Twitted by Parlez_me_nTory [...]
September 4th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I don’t think that you can use this as a tale of how not to do politics. Surely, once someone has gone beyond merely identifying with a few ideas of a party to actually making the argument in defence of the party itself (and probably buying into a lot of the paranoid claptrap?) then they’ve changed as a person?
I lived next door to a guy who claimed to be working class and consistently voted Tory and UKIP. Now it was obvious to anyone that he hadn’t a clue about politics: he didn’t buy into the sinister racism of the BNP but he obviously read the Daily Mail about ‘political correctness gone mad’ etc. Every time we met (for there was nothing separating our back yards and he’d come out for a smoke and I’d be doing dishes our whatever) we’d tussle over politics.
Every time he ended up at a loss – though he refused to change his position. Yet he was a solid union man, and when the RMT ran a slate in the Euro elections this year, I brought him some leaflets and finally now I hear no more of UKIP and the Tories. My point is that all the rationed argument in the world won’t have an immediate or indeed any effect – sometimes it takes bigger events to connect with a given individual.
Perhaps all you need do with your former friend is wait for those events to kick in.
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 11:32 am
[...] Full article: http://hadleigh.eu/2009/09/politics-between-friends/ [...]
September 4th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Sad story, Hadleigh. And as a 20-something not in touch with any school friends, I admire your perseverance.
Ultimately I believe that politics (and probably religion) lie at the heart of a person. I can get on with someone I really disagree with but never be close friends with someone when I doubt their values.
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Ever seen Rhinoceros by Eugène Ionesco?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_(play)
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Hadleigh… you’re 20! If you were 50 your tale might have moved me to a poignant smile, at your age…it’s pure tragedy!
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Hi Paul,
I haven’t seen it performed but I know plenty about it. La Cantatrice Chauve is a favourite of mine too!
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
I hope so. He’ll know where to find me.
[Reply]
September 4th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
That’s disappointing, I’m sorry you lost your friend when you were close for so long. I manage to get on with many friends with different political views but then again they have never got so extreme about it in a conversation or debate, generally just easy-going disagreement. Maybe in a few years he will see UKIP/BNP et al. for what they really are, his views will become more moderate and you’ll get back in touch.
[Reply]
September 5th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
The question you pose towards the start of your post – why we find it easier to ‘agree to disagree’ on religious questions than political ones – is quite interesting.
Unlike politics, it is hard to imagine that the issues at stake in religious discussions (e.g. whether or not there is a God) might be resolvable through debate. This might make us more inclined to agree to disagree, because it’s not as if our dispute is likely to be settled in some empirical, verifiable way.
This feels like the right answer, but (arguably) religious belief is more akin than political belief to a set of factual claims about the universe. To be sure, both religious and political beliefs can address matters of fact, but it seems to me that religion tends to be more deeply rooted in factual claims (most notably, the claim that there is a God). It is hard to characterize political belief in this way.
If so, then this complicates the idea that we’re less inclined to ‘agree to disagree’ about politics because there’s a higher chance of our disputes being settled in some empirical, verifiable way.
As is no doubt clear, I haven’t thought about this very deeply….. but I do think that it’s an interesting question.
[NB: No offense is intended to anyone's religious or political beliefs...!]
[Reply]
September 6th, 2009 at 12:57 am
A very strong personal example of an interesting point.
While I know more about reinforced concrete than human motivations (architecture degree), I can contribute:
- for us atheists it’s quite easy to agree to disagree because we have absolutely no afterlife at stake. The ‘wheel of reincarnation’ doesn’t threaten our ‘promised land’ because we have none. Recognising that the whole thing is improvable trivialises the issue, so we see no harm in other religions (so long as they don’t start interfering in politics).
- politics, on the other hand, I do take more seriously because it directly affects my life and those of others. For those who identify problems, causes and solutions these are very real. When, to accomplish these aims, we form political groupings with likeminded people this accentuates our differences.
- finally there is the nature of the people involved. Providing that they are doing it right, people of faith tend to be kind and generous individuals. Despite a few Old Testament differences, I am happily flat-sharing with a Christian; a Tory however…
[Reply]
October 1st, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Good post Hadleigh,
It raises an interesting point – opinion is never fact, yet the majority of people try to impose these opinions on everyone else!
In terms of religion, I am quite religious but not to a hugely radical extent as I too can see the point of existentialism. I am all for “spreading the word of Jesus”, that is fine, but there is a difference between spreading the word and forcefeeding it down my throat – I recall one man shouting in the middle of the Abbey that Jesus was “going to burn my soul in eternal hell for my sins” – all because I didn’t take a leaflet from him!
In terms of politics, it is the same idea, I have no problem with what people’s views are, so long as they don’t force them upon anyone else nor if their views cause harm to others.
However between friends this black and white approach does not seem to work, I have some friends who vote Labour, some who vote Conservative – I have no problem with either, and holding a reasonable debate can often be thought-provoking and fun over an issue which polarises opinion.
However it doesn’t always end like that, often I have heard people slinging insults about the closests religion or political party to my views that in fact have nothing to do with what we are talking about. It all descends into chaos.
While I don’t have many close friends who have wholly extreme views in either discipline of politics, religion or football – if I did I think to agree to disagree is always the best option, friendship has to run deeper than a persons views on how the country should be run, or what faith they believe in or what team they support. At the end of the day, a true friend is someone who respects your views – no matter what they are.
I am sorry for your ordeal with your friend, it sounds like a deep wound – but well done for standing up for what you believe in!
[Reply]