At one time, Utah had a fairly even split between the Democratic and Republican parties. Democrats Calvin Rampton and Scott Matheson spent long stretches as governors of Utah. Before Republican Orrin Hatch, Frank Moss was a successful Democratic senator from Utah.
There is a theory in some political thinking that history runs in repeatable cycles. The re-emergence of neo-Nazism might be one example. This is especially disturbing as my own parents fought to quash Nazism in World War II. But with each new generation, if the lessons of history are not learned, our societies end up repeating mistakes that could have been avoided.
Modern citizens often do not perceive making historical mistakes. For example, conservatives and Republicans have often seen the 1950s as a social and political ideal in which to return. They may not remember how the rebellious 1960s followed as a consequence of the conservative 50s. If we consider the 2020s conservative (which is questionable) should we expect a rebellious 2030s?
Still the arguments against history repeating itself are strong. With ever-increasing world populations, societal circumstances are always changing and new situations are always arising.
One of the prominent features of the 1960s was the popularity of academic philosophy. Every bookstore had large sections of books by Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Kant, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Mill, Marx and Sartre. Are these names familiar to anyone now?
In 1968, France (and several other countries) experienced large student protests threatening their government with the possibility of a neo-Marxist revolution. Reading Karl Marx was very popular. Studying theories of ethics, morality and politics were essential. Societal conditions were often chaotic with the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War protests.
Logic and morality were combined. Questions were asked of each candidate’s positions. Were they telling the truth about Vietnam? Were they honest with the public? Were our leaders consistent in what they said? Did their actions match their words? Did they have a character that valued virtue and patriotism?
Years later it was found out that American generals either lied or distorted their reports to Americans to keep the war going. Could they have saved American lives had they just been more honest with us, the president and our representatives in Congress?
We face the same questions today. Do our candidates in Utah value truth and honesty? Or are they smitten by what Marxists call the “cult of personality”? Do they believe in doing what’s right for the people, or do they put power over the common good?
These questions are particularly important today because with Donald Trump we experienced four years where truthfulness was sacrificed to his drive for power and fame. “Truth” was bent for political advantage.
We have to ask ourselves, do our candidates for the Senate and the House of Representatives value the truth and understand that the 2020 election was not stolen?
One of the important philosophies to come out of the 1960s was existentialism. The word is now most commonly used in the phrase “existential threat,” indicating the possibility of a horrific crisis. But the philosophy of existentialism more broadly consisted of dealing honestly with life in all its aspects whether good or bad. If you make a mistake you own up to it and deal with it honestly.
Trump could have been a great president if he had not lied so much, not blamed others for his mistakes, not accused his opponents of the very same wrongdoing that he had committed. When a leader won’t admit his mistakes or his wrongdoing, he creates a fantasy world for his followers who are then liable to believe any fantastic conspiracy.
Morally and politically, a person who does not own up to his transgressions is a weak person and as a leader he is a weak leader no matter how much blustery rhetoric he spews forth. Are our Utah representatives strong enough to be existentialists?
Our major political conflict is between power and moral integrity. This is made more difficult by negative political ads. All a person can do is try to get to know a candidate as well as you can and evaluate their past record. But this year don’t vote for someone who still believes in “The Big Lie.”
Gary Leimback
Gary Leimback is a Utah writer who has studied much philosophy and still values its importance to our society.
Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible