drewkitty

Apparently this bit of forbidden lore I picked up in Political Science classes long ago has been forgotten.

Accordingly, here goes:

Let us imagine that we have two factions. We could call them Democrats or Republicans, or Side A and Side B, or vegans and meat-eaters, or Christian fundamentalists and pagans -- whatever. All we need is that they are opposed to each other in a way that cannot be easily reconciled.

Line them up on a scale, where zero represents the hard core Democrat/SideA/Vegan/Christian and six represents the hard core Republican/SideB/meat-eating/pagan.

0-1-2-3-4-5-6

(bonus points to those who recognize the Kinsey scale)

The people at "0" and "6" are not going anywhere. The zero is holding on to his blue donkey "A" cap with a cross on it and eating celery. The six will not let go of his red "B" scarf with a Celtic knot on it while chomping down on venison. Their positions are known and they will not relent. Appealing to them is a waste of your time and energy. They vote, they spend money -- but they storm off in a huff when you are too "moderate" for them or "compromise your ideals" to get anything done.

The people at positions "2" and "4" are especially interesting. These are the people who have a slight bias either towards or away from the strongly cherished beliefs. A "2" or a "4" can often be presented with hard evidence, is willing to listen, and might be swayed. If so, they won't sway very far. Either they will become more confirmed in their beliefs ("1" and "5") or they will drift the other direction ("3").

So if you are a politician at position "1" or position "5", you often have a choice in how you present your views and arguments. You can hold hard at your position ("Read my lips!"), you can appeal to the extremes at "0" and "6" ("Kiss my ass!") or you can appeal, sensibly and rationally, to the neutrals at "3" and the soft opposition at "4" or "2."

This latter is "screw thy friends" (0/1) and (5/6) to "woo thy enemies" at (2) and (4).

Any moderate or centrist politician is a past master of this, as are good American presidents. Obama is a great buddy-screwer, as was Reagan.

One current example is Obama's failure to pursue the gun control agenda. Obama's voting record puts him at a solid "1" on gun control issues. However, he can't afford to push so many of those gun-owning, pickup truck driving voters in swing and red states ("4") over into the Republican ("5") and NRA ("6") camps. So the Brady campaign ("0") is neglected because Obama frankly has more important things on his mind, like being re-elected.

Another great example is Democrats and gay rights. Let's assume that LGBTAQWXYZWTFBBQ is "0" and the Mormons are "5" with the "put them all in [happy] camps" types over at "6" while the Democrats are somewhere in the "1" to "2" range. Supporting gay rights but it's not their cause.

What is a self-respecting WTFBBQ at "0" going to do if the Democrat doesn't pursue their agenda? Marry a conservative? Become Catholic?

However, there are a lot of people over at "3" and "4" who are going to become ... cranky ... or at the very least, suspicious if the Democrat pursues gay rights and gay marriage. So the Democrat throws the "0" under the bus to avoid pissing off those "3"s and mobilizing those "4"s into an anti-them campaign. How? By doing what is easiest, or absolutely nothing.

Screw thy friends to woo thy enemies.

An interesting application of this is with respect to minority rights. I've seen race activists throw down on liberals, gender activists beat up on fellow travelers, gays disrespect bisexuals, and NRA members flame Republicans way too many times.

Why? Because "0" and "6" do not TALK to each other. Anything they say to each other, they say in a courtroom. I am reminded of an otherwise forgettable book title, "How To Talk To A Liberal ... If You Must."

But both "0" and "6" get very frustrated with fellow travelers who are oh-so-close yet oh-so-far from their own positions. They will talk to "1"s and "5"s, but mostly yell at them for not being "0" and "6" enough. This may be phrased as "education" or "political correctness."

Usually the "1"s and "5"s are puzzled and hurt. They're already "allies," they already "mostly" agree, and they're sensible, politically correct, and have put their time in for the cause. Why are the "0" and "6" kicking them in the snout? It's not FAIR.

That's politics. Close counts only in horseshoes and ordinance. The distance between "0"/"1" and "5"/"6" is often greater, stronger and deeper than the distance between "1"/"2" and "4"/"5" -- another factor that smart politicians have to take into account.

Conversation with the middle, "2" and "3" and "4" is a lot more civil. There's a perception that there's a lot to lose (and there is) by being rude, civil, trotting out the worst or most tired arguments ("Jesus Said It, That Settles It!" or "It's A Choice/Child, not a Child/Choice"), etc.

Another way I've heard it said is "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."