When I was a boy, something important happened in the Southern Baptist Convention. Three men got together and devised a plan to gain control of the leadership of the convention. As far as I know there was nothing that they did which was technically out of bounds as seen through the SBC Constitution and bylaws, but part of what they did was definitely ethically questionable.
I don't know how it is today, but at the time, the president of the SBC could appoint a certain number of people, unopposed, each year to leadership positions. That wasn't generally a problem since the leadership of the SBC shifted from conservative to moderate on a regular basis. These three men, however, and here comes the questionable part, realized that if they had enough people present to elect their candidate for the presidency at the opening meeting of the convention, and then have those people leave before the next sessions began the next day, they could create a large enough mass of departures that the number of attendees at subsequent sessions would not reach a quorum. Failure to reach a quorum in the subsequent sessions meant that debate could take place, items could be proposed, but nothing could be put to a vote, which would result in the decisions falling to the discretion of the president and his leadership. Applying the "wash, rinse, repeat" method year in and year out would insure that they could wrest control of the SBC from "liberal" Southern Baptists who were taking the denomination to hell in a handbasket. This development coincided with the movement of the Religious Right in American politics.
You might be wondering why the liberals didn't fight fire with fire. I don't know why. You might also be wondering why this seems important to me. Let me explain my thoughts.
To hear them tell it, the Southern Baptist Convention of my parents' and grandparents' generations was an organization able to debate, sometimes very heatedly, the social and religious topics of the day, pray about what they believed to be right, cast their votes for it, and then accept the outcome of the majority-rule vote with the understanding that if that is what the majority wanted then it must be the right thing to do for now. If it turned out to be too much to swallow, they would regroup and address the issue again at the next possible juncture. When this takeover happened, however, it became Us-vs-Them. A fight for control began. Rather than considering what everyone thought was best for the direction of the denomination, a few men devised a plan to create a vacuum which would send control of the decision-making into a very few hands of people who thought the way they did. You can rest assured that there were many on the left-of-center side of the SBC who were not happy seeing their opportunity for a fair and open debate and vote usurped.
Nationally, in 2017, we find ourselves in a position where the Republican party, aided by the Tea Party movement, has done a similar, but reverse version of what happened within the SBC. While Democrats were busy at the national level moving the social debate forward, creating more equality under the law, and seeing that we make the world "a better place", Republicans have quietly been winning the seats which control the levers of power. In the SBC it was the presidency. In the USA it is the local and state level positions. By winning those state seats, Republicans have been able to minimize the effect of voters for the Democratic party. By gerrymandering districts for years, they have been able to either sequester Democratic turnout to one or two districts, or dilute the Democratic turnout to such an extent that it leads to a much higher likelihood of success for the Republican candidate.
Please understand I am not demonizing the GOP for their cunning. While I don't like what they have done, it is not because the Dem's don't or can't gerrymander districts, it is because it has gone unopposed and unnoticed by a large portion of the left for so long that it has spread like a weed soaking up all of the nourishment for growth in the grassroots of the Democratic party.
Now we find ourselves at a point where effective Democratic vote is centralized in large urban areas. Twice in the last five presidential elections they have out-voted the GOP and still lost the election. This might not be so disconcerting, except for the great disparity in the 2016 election of almost 2.9 million votes. This trend is likely to continue if Democrats don't do something. It is time for Democrats to rise up on the local and state levels. Just as the conservatives did in the SBC, as Republicans did in state and local politics, Democrats must now rise up in the places where power is built, take control of the seats that make the decisions about redistricting and tilt the playing field back to the center, if not the left.
Moderate southern baptists waited too long to act, and as a result lost the opportunity to debate and direct in the decision-making process. In baseball they tell you that you can't get a hit if you don't swing the bat. It is time for state and local democrats to step to the plate (run for office) and swing the bat.
I don't know how it is today, but at the time, the president of the SBC could appoint a certain number of people, unopposed, each year to leadership positions. That wasn't generally a problem since the leadership of the SBC shifted from conservative to moderate on a regular basis. These three men, however, and here comes the questionable part, realized that if they had enough people present to elect their candidate for the presidency at the opening meeting of the convention, and then have those people leave before the next sessions began the next day, they could create a large enough mass of departures that the number of attendees at subsequent sessions would not reach a quorum. Failure to reach a quorum in the subsequent sessions meant that debate could take place, items could be proposed, but nothing could be put to a vote, which would result in the decisions falling to the discretion of the president and his leadership. Applying the "wash, rinse, repeat" method year in and year out would insure that they could wrest control of the SBC from "liberal" Southern Baptists who were taking the denomination to hell in a handbasket. This development coincided with the movement of the Religious Right in American politics.
You might be wondering why the liberals didn't fight fire with fire. I don't know why. You might also be wondering why this seems important to me. Let me explain my thoughts.
To hear them tell it, the Southern Baptist Convention of my parents' and grandparents' generations was an organization able to debate, sometimes very heatedly, the social and religious topics of the day, pray about what they believed to be right, cast their votes for it, and then accept the outcome of the majority-rule vote with the understanding that if that is what the majority wanted then it must be the right thing to do for now. If it turned out to be too much to swallow, they would regroup and address the issue again at the next possible juncture. When this takeover happened, however, it became Us-vs-Them. A fight for control began. Rather than considering what everyone thought was best for the direction of the denomination, a few men devised a plan to create a vacuum which would send control of the decision-making into a very few hands of people who thought the way they did. You can rest assured that there were many on the left-of-center side of the SBC who were not happy seeing their opportunity for a fair and open debate and vote usurped.
Nationally, in 2017, we find ourselves in a position where the Republican party, aided by the Tea Party movement, has done a similar, but reverse version of what happened within the SBC. While Democrats were busy at the national level moving the social debate forward, creating more equality under the law, and seeing that we make the world "a better place", Republicans have quietly been winning the seats which control the levers of power. In the SBC it was the presidency. In the USA it is the local and state level positions. By winning those state seats, Republicans have been able to minimize the effect of voters for the Democratic party. By gerrymandering districts for years, they have been able to either sequester Democratic turnout to one or two districts, or dilute the Democratic turnout to such an extent that it leads to a much higher likelihood of success for the Republican candidate.
Please understand I am not demonizing the GOP for their cunning. While I don't like what they have done, it is not because the Dem's don't or can't gerrymander districts, it is because it has gone unopposed and unnoticed by a large portion of the left for so long that it has spread like a weed soaking up all of the nourishment for growth in the grassroots of the Democratic party.
Now we find ourselves at a point where effective Democratic vote is centralized in large urban areas. Twice in the last five presidential elections they have out-voted the GOP and still lost the election. This might not be so disconcerting, except for the great disparity in the 2016 election of almost 2.9 million votes. This trend is likely to continue if Democrats don't do something. It is time for Democrats to rise up on the local and state levels. Just as the conservatives did in the SBC, as Republicans did in state and local politics, Democrats must now rise up in the places where power is built, take control of the seats that make the decisions about redistricting and tilt the playing field back to the center, if not the left.
Moderate southern baptists waited too long to act, and as a result lost the opportunity to debate and direct in the decision-making process. In baseball they tell you that you can't get a hit if you don't swing the bat. It is time for state and local democrats to step to the plate (run for office) and swing the bat.
Comments
Post a Comment