To Vote...or Not to Vote...Perchance to Sin

Felix Miller's "Why Voting for Biden Isn't Necessarily a Sin---And Why That Matters" is a helpful, refreshing piece in the conservative Witherspoon's symposium on our 2020 election. (https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/category/2020-election). Happily, the series of articles offers a range of voting options: two predictably endorse Trump; one argues for the no-vote; one supports the American Solidarity Party; and Miller surprisingly shows how Catholic moral principles allow for a sincere, principled and reasoned decision for Biden. The piece and series are noteworthy for a number of reasons. 

Thought experiment: can you imagine a progressive symposium in which a participant laid out the grounds for a justifiable vote for Trump. It is unthinkable! For several reasons. First, the man is morally offensive in unprecedented ways. Secondly, he is himself a nearly absolute populist contradiction of the values and views of the liberal, elite overclass. But thirdly, there has occurred tragically in recent years a pronounced narrowing and debasement of the progressive mind into moralism, condescension, paranoia and hysterical emotionalism. There is a near total incapacity to listen to and consider adversarial opinions. By contrast, the conservative mind, at its best, is open to argument, contradiction and actual diversity of thought. The "conservative" mind true to itself is "liberal" in the classic sense. 

Even more reassuring, for this Catholic, is use of the word "sin." Politics and policy are arenas of morality and so the reality of sin is fundamental. There is original and actual; mortal and venial; all of it in its dark, dismal density and duplicity, at the core of politics. Sin is the choice for evil and a personal offense against God and creation. Do you ever hear mention of it? The "woke" worldview of the technocratic, liberated elite has replaced sin with the "...isms" and "...phobias."  Such are viewed as  moral/psychic infections of the deplorable underclass. They are largely involuntary, the curse of the uneducated deplorables who cling to guns and religion. I myself, for example, do not see systematic white racism so I am a certified racist; I hold strong traditional views on the distinctive vocation, responsibilities, and rights of women and men so I am a misogynist; I view sexuality as inherently sacred in its unitive and procreative purposes and so am rabidly homophobic. I am among the most deplorable of deplorables. There is hope for me nevertheless, not in confession-contrition, but in "diversity training!"

Miller's piece retrieves the classic Catholic discussion on "cooperation with evil" and the decisive distinctions which are so important. Cooperation with evil is evil; so, the pro-choice vote is a participation in the evil of millions of abortion. That is simple enough. But there is the key distinction between formal and material cooperation. The later involves material but not intentional or full participation; while formal means there is real knowledge, consent and collaboration. Contrast: a taxi or Uber driver brings me to the bank, which I rob, and drives me home without knowledge of my mission. He is materially but not formally cooperative. If on the other hand, he accepted 20% of the take for his services he becomes formally cooperative. So, we can imagine a German in the early 1930s voting for Hitler, not to kill Jews and conquer the world, but to stave off the Communists, or revive the economy and national pride. Materially he aided the Nazis but that was not his understanding or intent. Objectively he participated in a catastrophic political evil but subjectively he may be innocent of sin. 

We can also distinguish between remote and proximate cooperation. If I drive my girlfriend to the abortion clinic and pay the bill, that is proximate; if I buy a cup of coffee at a restaurant fundraiser for Planned Parenthood that is quite remote. 

And so, we can imagine any number of scenarios in which a Catholic, and even a serious Conservative, might prudently, sincerely, rationally decide to vote for Biden. On the objective side: our world and its issues are boundlessly complicated so policy decisions are ever embedded in uncertainty and ambiguity. On the subjective side: political choices, especially for specific candidates, are informed by deep, largely unconscious memories, fears and aspirations. There is an immense apparently irrational dimension to such choices. Excepting inherent evils, it is wise not to moralize or personalize politics but to soberly consider policies and issues in their complexity, ambiguity and unpredictability, with openness to alternate prudential considerations. 

For me it would be a serious sin to vote in this election: both options are grievously evil. It is not a matter of a single issue; or a flawed individual; or a lesser evil. Each option,  in distinctive ways, are essentially entangled in a web, a swamp, a system of malice. Trump: his vile contempt for women, Hispanics, and those who oppose him is a grave scandal for our young and all of us; his breathtaking disregard for truth and reality is borderline sociopathic and disqualifies him as dogcatcher, crossing guard, or busboy; his hatred has polarized and degraded our nation; his blinding narcissism and dismissal of expertise (medical, environmental, military, intelligence...) make him dysfunctional, reckless and dangerous. Biden: has sold his sold to the hegemonic elite who massacre babies; deconstruct masculinity, femininity, sexuality, marriage and family; destroy our religious liberties; unshackle technology to crush what is honorable and worthy; advocate a racist "anti-racism" that oppresses poor blacks and further emasculates their men; and despise the underclass and the devout as ignorant, fearful and retrograde. Biden is much worse, But Trump is far too evil to be entertained as "the lesser evil."

The argument for the American Solidarity Party is reasonable: it is a gesture (entirely symbolic) toward positive values and an exercise in our cherished right to vote. For my part, I prefer the "no vote." I resent the constant hectoring to vote and treasure my right not to vote. The vote is a right, not an obligation. Most of us most of the time have a moral obligation NOT to vote because a responsible, moral vote demands that we study the issues, the candidates and the policies. Pulling the lever habitually for one party or the other is irresponsible. I have never voted in a school board election and never will. The way things look now, I may never vote again...I will not be a lesser man for it; the world will not be a worse place for it. Politics, like psychotherapy and the opera and hockey and metaphysics, is not for everyone; it is for those who want it. Voting is overrated! 

The "no vote position" frees from the contamination of entanglement in the conflicting systems of rancor, fear, indignation and hysteria. It allows a certain lightness, a "live and let live"  relaxation from indignation, judgment and anger. It allows for a sober, objective and even certain judgment that a vote for Trump and/or Biden is a participation substantial evil; even as it  frees from the toxic condemnation of the heart and mind of my brother or sister. Such freedom is greatly needed in this time of rancor, polarization and demonization of the adversary. It is wholesome for us to fiercely disagree on an issue, and yet respect, love and even like the opponent. With the "no vote position" we enter a luminous zone that transcends the hatred, fear and polarization. Better yet, it allows us a communion with both parties: with the one we commiserate about Trumpian decadence as we concern ourselves with the environment, economic inequality and the demise of ordinary civilizational decency under this President. With the other we protect (from the totalitarian left) innocent human life, religious liberty, the meaning of marriage and sexuality, and the dignity of the underclass. With the "no vote position" we happily impute the best intentions and a good heart to our friends on both sides of the divide; even as we renounce the grave evil operative in both camps and grieve the lack of moral intelligence that allows a vote for either choice.

Again, in 2020 we are facing something similar to, if less than, Hitler vs. Stalin. Or more accurately, our situation resembles the civil war in Spain of the 1930s. Left and right were both guilty of profound evils; neither were devoid of goodness. A Catholic would have to protect the Church; but only with deepest ambivalence.

What would Jesus do? I have never liked that question. But I have trouble imagining him, white robes and long hair and beard, with a MAGA hat or a ""By-Don" button. I can imagine him boycotting the vote as he engages in the "Kingdom politics" of joyful service of the poor and friendship in truth and worship. That's what I want to do! I won't vote!