|
EDITOR'S NOTE:
Calvin College's Doug Koopman (left) teaches political science and is
program director for the Paul B Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity
and Politics at Calvin. He is in Philadelphia where he is teaching a
class on presidential conventions and will attend the RNC. He agreed
to keep an on-line diary for the office of media relations while in
Philadelphia. His missives follow below.
8/4/00 -- Last
night the convention ended with George W. Bush's acceptance speech.
I wanted to be in the auditorium to compare his "live" delivery with
what I was sure to see later on television. And I was especially interested
in his use of religious language and symbol. His speech was, of course,
well received, and he looked to the conventioneers the way I'm sure
his advisors wanted to look -- serious, authoritative, and articulate.
In person he performed
well, and media commentators also seemed to give him good marks for
his television appearance. My impression was that he used religious
symbolism in a different way. One usually expects from Republican presidents
a fairly clear assertion that America is God's chosen, righteous, nation.
That chosen nature usually has two major policy consequences that come
quite soon after in the speech -- a strong defense that preserves "the
American way of life" for its citizens, and (at least for the last twenty
years) opposition to abortion and pledges to restrict its practice.
George W. Bush's
speech was different. Certainly there were proposals to strengthen defense
and limit abortions. But these were placed in the policy section of
the speech, devoid of religious reference. The religious language came
later. It was far more personal, expressing his own need of grace and
experience of peace. And it had only one consequence that could at all
be tied to policy - tolerance and love of neighbor. To the best of my
recollection, this seems a strong departure from the prior practice
of Republican presidents and presidential candidates.
My two weeks in
Philadelphia are now at an end. It was a tremendous opportunity to directly
experience how modern presidential nominating conventions are organized,
carried out, and reported. And it was great to begin new friendships
and renew old ones.
8/2/00 -- A raucous
crowd is no stranger to Calvin College, at least during basketball season.
A charismatic religious revival, on the other hand, has probably never
shown its face on campus for our theology and praxis is not much of
the "enthusiastic" kind.
But I observed
something of each experience last night at the Republican National Convention.
Previously restricted to positive speeches and light entertainment,
Wednesday night's convention featured vice-presidential nominee Dick
Cheney delivering a comparatively pointed and partisan acceptance speech.
Clinton was "the man from Hope going home to… New York" and Gore the
man with "a thousand promises, a thousand attacks."
The crowd loved
this little attack of its own. Cheney's speech seemed to release two
days of pent-up emotions by the crowd. Relatively mild jabs brought
howls of delight, rounds of cheers, and even some prolonged chants of
"no more Gore." The happy little gathering at last had permission to
celebrate (what they hope will be) the pending demise of folks they
love to hate. All this seemed to start in good fun, much like most home
Calvin basketball games this year in which we happily trounced the opposition,
especially if their name begins with Clinton's hometown.
But more intellectually
troubling was the unbounded patriotism of the lesser-known convention
speakers, a patriotism that bred an uncomfortable (to me) feeling in
the crowd. America is a great nation and I'm grateful to live here,
mostly because of its opportunities and freedoms, especially that I'm
allowed to worship and believe as I wish without much interference.
But at times last night's message was beyond appreciation, even beyond
civil religion, touching on idolatry of a particular idea of America.
And the idea expressed
last night was essentially that America is great because it allows one
to accumulate wealth without placing any demands on its use. I kept
listening and watching for a hint of a higher purpose or ethical limit.
And if one was there, I missed it. To be fair, the other party is prey
to a similar idolatrous idea that one's ideas and behaviors are completely
one's own without any responsibility to the greater good or higher truths.
The question is
whether this mood was merely the temporary mass consciousness of a highly
charged political event, or something at the root of partisan political
activists. I hope and think its temporary. Indeed, my conversations
with individual delegates and other conventioneers almost universally
reveal folks with financial and time priorities in good balance between
work, family, and faith. But there is something unsettling about any
"mob," Republican or Democrat, Calvin (or Hope) that even at the height
of enthusiasm does not recognize the limits of its goodness, importance
and sovereignty.
8/1/00 -- Sponsored
spontaneity seems to be the best phrase to describe both the protest
demonstrations and the Bush campaign events of the last few days. News
reports have highlighted the protests in Philadelphia, but in fact few
participants in the convention have been disrupted in any way, and I
suspect many delegates are only even aware of the demonstrations through
what they might pick up on the news.
The protesters
are well organized, almost too much so. There are four or five main
protest organizing centers, including one on the University of Pennsylvania
campus where my students and I are staying. Each protest center seems
to have its own following, diluting the effects that a combined protest
might provide. And the strategies of most of these protest groups are
also well planned. Yesterday, traffic was disrupted by small groups
of protesters tying themselves together and stopping major intersections.
Once police rushed to one area to clear things out, a new small band
of protesters would "spontaneously" do the same thing in another part
of the city. Police would rush to the new place, protesters would take
action at a third location, and the cycle repeated itself most of the
day. Apparently this strategy was coordinated by e-mails, cell phones,
and beepers - yet another (apparently unredeemed) use for our high-tech
communications equipment. So far the demonstrations have been disruptive
but peaceful. According to media reports late Tuesday night, the injury
list includes four police and no protestors.
The Bush rallies
in Harrisburg on Tuesday and at a Philadelphia Airport and a downtown
park Wednesday morning are equally contrived. Bush staffers called our
students Monday morning and offered to pick up in busses as many students
as possible at 5:30 a.m. Wednesday to greet Bush in Philadelphia. Those
signing up, of course, would have to go through a "training session"
on Tuesday evening, presumably to learn how to look excited upon seeing
the Texas governor the next day. Apparently most state delegations were
also called, soliciting attendance at the Bush rallies by anyone willing
to get up that early and show some spontaneous enthusiasm for "W."
Meanwhile in convention
hall, the unruffled delegates enjoyed a combination of "defense night"
and a pleasant walk down memory lane. Major foreign and defense policy
speeches were given by African-American advisor Condoleeza Rice, maverick
Republican John McCain, and openly gay U.S. Representative Jim Kolbe
of Arizona. The well-orchestrated combination of the traditional Republican
message with untraditional messengers earned rave reviews from delegates,
if not from all of the assembled media.
Last night also
brough a tribute to living former Republican presidents, with George
Bush and Jerry Ford in attendance, and Nancy Reagan filling in for her
husband. All in all, a pleasant night of nostalgia for the older generation
of Republicans.
7/31/00 -- Day
one of the convention. I wanted to attend the opening of the convention
in person, so that I could form my own impressions of the ambiance of
the First Union Center, the attitude of the assembled Republicans, and
the tone and success of the multi-media presentation masquerading as
the convention's order of business.
The first session
was Monday from 10 in the morning until 2 in the afternoon, the only
morning session of the four day convention and the only day in which
two sessions are scheduled. Through a friend of a friend I was able
to attain a pass to the "nosebleed" section of Center, about three lines
of security between my seat and the convention floor. But through meeting
old and new friends, by 1 in the afternoon I had made it on the floor
as if I were a full delegate or privileged member of the media.
The image that
kept coming to mind was the fourth quarter of a well-planned homecoming
game at a national football powerhouse. There are a lot of people milling
around, but few are watching the title event. Most are catching up with
old friends, buying hotdogs to eat or trinkets emblazoned with their
favorite team (in this case Bush/Cheney). The home team (in this case
the GOP) moves with precision to score time and time again, and the
losers (Democrats, of course) are humiliated.
The analogy only
breaks down in that few Democrats are inside (and none of them will
admit it). They're waiting for their own homecoming game in Los Angeles
a few weeks hence. My impression of the 2,066 delegates and same number
of alternates is that they are a very democratic (small "D") bunch -
from every state and congressional district in the nation in almost
perfect proportion to the population at large. And they are very much
a cross section of middle-class America, although a bit older, whiter,
and more educated. They also hold the ultimate power in this convention,
their votes for president and vice president. At the same time, they
have no discretion in deciding for whom to cast those votes. So while
most delegates are powerful political leaders in the cities, states,
and Washington, D.C., here they are virtually impotent in the official
business of the meeting.
Rather, their two
functions seem to be to look entertaining and to be entertained. Entertained
they were Monday night - effective speeches by Laura Bush and Colin
Powell, extended sound bites by the best of the Republican farm team
running in local and congressional elections, and the most diverse (musically
and ethnically) variety show I've ever seen at a GOP convention. For
a moment, I almost thought I was at the other party's convention.
And entertaining
as well. I rode home on the bus with someone I first thought was a "crazy
lady" who wore a foam red, white, and blue star on her head and covered
her clothes with Republican buttons. But she turned out to be quite
normal, at least in a relative sense. A state senator and party from
a Rocky Mountain state (further details withheld for obvious reasons),
she and I had a nice conversation over term limits, grazing fees, and
water rights. All fascinating stuff, if you're here in Philadelphia.
.
7/30/00 -- The
bulk of delegates to the Republican National Convention began arriving
Saturday, in plenty of time to take in some tours and parties before
the convention officially starts on Monday. Almost every state has a
separate area hotel, although a few large hotels may hold more than
one smaller state delegation. There is also a separate hotel for Bush/Cheney
headquarters and another for RNC staff.
The hotel distribution
is not coincidental, but allocated by a mysterious combination of a
lottery and national party leaders. Most state delegations are in downtown
Philadelphia hotels about a ten minute drive from the First Union Center.
Michigan, however, is approximately twice as far away from First Union,
on the northern boundary of the city of Philadelphia. The unconfirmed
but widely repeated rumor is that Michigan owes its lowly site to McCain's
Republican primary victory.
The Michigan delegation,
as with most state delegations, tends to keep to itself and stick together.
Busses shuttle the group to receptions or luncheons usually hosted by
state politicians or interests important to the state. The same busses
take delegates to and from each convention session. So the opportunity
to drift off individually is limited.
Michigan has a
moderately large delegation of 58 persons (and the same number of alternates).
Three delegates come from each of our sixteen congressional districts,
and ten are chosen "at large." And it makes no difference whether a
district is represented by a Republican or Democrat -- the most Democratic
district in Detroit gets the same number of delegates as districts in
Republican west Michigan.
Visiting with the
delegation at a reception Saturday evening, it seems composed of fairly
typical Michiganians. Middle class lifestyles with middle class values,
except for a far higher interest in political issues and power than
most of us. No "crazies" in the group, but certainly no Democrats either.
7/29/00 -- It is
an interesting assemblage of faculty and students gathered for our two-week
course on the Republican convention and presidential politics. There
are a total of fourteen faculty, only about half who teach political
science. The other half are in communications, either electronic media
or journalism. This makes sense, for like all modern presidential conventions
this one is a made-for-media event.
Whereas conventions
of yesteryear actually picked the presidential ticket, today their chief
function is to boost election prospects by energizing delegates and
presenting a favorable media image. While there are only about 4,000
delegates and alternates combined here in Philadelphia, there are more
than five times as many media with convention credentials. Even reporters
from college newspapers and tiny dot-coms get virtually unchecked access
to the floor. So there is much here for my colleagues interested in
communications.
The ideological
diversity of the faculty is interesting as well. Surveys of political
scientists have revealed that about 95 percent of them vote Democratic
and few have extensive practical experience in the field. But here about
two-thirds of my colleagues are Republicans (or at least sound like
it in their lectures and in our private conversations), and many have
practical political or media experience, including former office holders
and a former original anchor of CNN news.
The students are
less diverse than the faculty. About 90 percent are pretty sure they
are Republicans, although few would be comfortable describing themselves
are consistently conservative. Most are from small private schools,
such as Grove City, Adrian, or Harvey Mudd, and active in either college
Republicans or campus student government. And most are incredibly bright
and motivated, making my class sessions simultaneously the easiest and
most difficult I have taught with eager learners often asking questions
the answers to which I have to go back and research.
Our days this past
week consisted of morning speakers or tours, a two-hour early afternoon
class session that discusses the morning sessions, and then student
field placements in the later afternoon and evening. Convention week
the morning sessions will be shorter, and the student field placements
longer. The special challenge with these students is to make them critical
listeners and evaluators -- to be aware of the various speakers' use
of language, jargon, statistics, and characterization of their friends
and enemies, and, even, "worldviews."
That challenge
reinforces the wisdom of attempting, as we do at Calvin, to teach understanding
of the Christian and competing worldviews.
7/27/00 -- I've
been in Philadelphia since late Friday, July 21, teaching a class on
presidential conventions at the Republican National Convention. At first
blush, the city bears a resemblence to Grand Rapids, with a river running
right down the center dividing a newly rebuilt downtown from older parts
of the city to the west. Along the river, in this case the Schuylkill,
runs an expressway from north and south. But Philadelphia is far larger
than Grand Rapids, and this city has large and compact ethnic neighborhoods,
especially Italian and Irish, which must look much the way they did
fifty and perhaps even one hundred years ago.
The site of the
Republican Convention is the First Union Center, a nearly new sports
complex in which the Philadelphia Flyers play. And First Union looks
much like an overgrown VanAndel Arena, inside and out, in this case
holding about 22,000 spectators for an average sporting event. It's
also well south of the center city, approximately three miles from downtown
and sharing an old and now well-secured industrial area with Veterans
Stadium and the Spectrum Arena.
The parking lot
that surrounds First Union is covered with more than a dozen media tents
the size of at least two football fields each, looking like rows of
greenhouses growing who knows what. Inside, the arena is a long way
from finished, with at least three hundred workers constructing the
stage and floor, and laying computer, light, and media cables.
As part of the
students' orientation to Philadelphia, we toured the historic distict
that includes Independence Hall, the Liberty Bell, and other landmarks
of the nation's struggle for independence and stability. The significance
of the upcoming convention was magnified by recalling the history of
this city, the home of the ealiest "political conventions" which produced
the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.
More than two hundred
years later we still govern ourselves under the principles of self-government
outlined in these two documents. Even modern political conventions,
as influenced as they are by the media and large financial interests,
are still at the core means by which average citizens can choose their
own leaders.
|