America: “A Rhetoric of Consensus”?

Some formal aspects of the American elections leave us, Portuguese, somewhat perplexed, accustomed as we are to particularly linear processes at this level. This idiosyncrasy has, from the very outset, run through an electoral system that the 18th century founders thought should combine various process balances, from indirect methodologies to others of direct democracy, fraught with subtleties.

However, more than that “alien” system, I am certain that what causes us the biggest confusion, while not easily identified, is, precisely, the importance certain unique features take on in this process.

Observe, for example, that core ritual in the life of Americans — not just of individuals, but also of the collective, the nation — that of Thanksgiving.

Contrary to what was written — incorrectly — in one translation of President Obama’s speech on a Portuguese television channel, Americans don’t “value” this day. What the president actually said was that they “give thanks.” In fact, Thanksgiving dates back to the colonial beginnings, when, after crucial help from the Native Americans, the community of New England gave thanks to God, marking a year of survival in that hostile territory.

This has been, however, since its origin precisely four centuries ago, a ceremony where the fundamental core of society, the family, comes together to give thanks for what was given to them throughout the year. Individual, family and community interact in a ritual that, though obviously secular, has a religious dimension.

Because of Thanksgiving’s cross-cutting link in American society, the political rhetoric uttered around this time is relevant to understanding the symptoms, not so much of concrete partisan objectives, but of how those sensitivities appeal to the people’s expectations around a common identity.

One thinker on this reality, Sacvan Bercovitch, spoke once of the “rhetoric of consensus” that constitutes a common ground for Americans, independent of their political sensibilities: America as the promised land; a select and predestined people; the spirit of mission — in defense of liberal democracy, for example; individual responsibility; and finally, the American dream. That is, many of the traits that Max Weber, today disputed, identified as the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. But above all, it is that which Martin Luther King Jr., in the celebration of a wider community, summarized in his famous “I have a dream” speech.

Democrats and Republicans, however more or less radical, share this common ground, which they interpret with differing emphases. More than in ideologies, as they were conceived in Europe, it is in how these emphases are posited to act over that common ground that the American political discourse should be understood.

Because of this, it won’t be thought strange, for example, that Obama, as much as the governor of Texas, Rick Perry — standing for the Republican candidacy — has taken positions that highlight the action of “democratic normalization” of America in the world: the president thanking the American troops deployed in other countries, Perry rerunning a testimonial from an Afghanistan war veteran.

There are obviously other traits, but I think that these demonstrate what may constitute the future political discourse, independent from those that originated it; that is, the emphases are different, the dialogue with other nations is more or less clear, or favoring other axes, but the strong belief will always persist that America can be that “beacon” of democracy and liberty. In the end, “In God we trust.”