Conventional Fun and Focus

Man is, by nature, a political animal.
            Aristotle, Politics       

Over this past week, we have been treated (or for some, subjected) to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida.  Next week, the Democrats will meet in the great town of Charlotte, North Carolina.  For a political junkie and a government teacher such as myself, I find these acts of pageantry quite fascinating and usually am suckered in every time, hanging on every speech and subplot.  What many might not know is that the current manifestation of the nominating convention is a recent development.  However, the theatrical nature of the conventions has been a constant and a source of their draw. 

In the 19^th-century, American politics were radically different than the spectacles broadcast every four summers.  There were no primaries prior to the Progressive Movement of the first two decades of the next century.  Therefore, the battle for a party’s nomination was a fight, sometimes literally, on the convention floor.  In 1880, the Republicans were mired in a battle that pitted James Garfield from Ohio, an advocate for civil service reform and Roscoe Conklin of New York, a staunch patronage promoter.  Convention battles have also been the proving ground of splinter parties, such as the Populist split with the Democrat Party in 1896 and the Dixiecrats from the same party in 1948.  The Republicans, not as old as their main competitor, have wrangled with progressive factions in 1904, 1908 and 1912.  Of course, the most divisive election was the 1860 election that pitted a Republican, two Democrats and a very vague third (fourth?) party.  Abraham Lincoln won that election with less than 40% of the vote. 

Conventions have been so contentious, violence has erupted from time to time.  In 1968, the violence erupted both on the convention floor and outside in the streets for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.  The clash between police and protestors is well documented but few know of the fist-fights that nearly erupted on the convention floor.  When a Georgia delegate was being taken from the convention hall by security, CBS reporter Dan Rather tried to interview the man but security attacked, dragging him to the ground and punching him in the stomach.  Then, during the speech to introduce the candidate, George McGovern, Sen. Abraham Ribicoff (D-CT) railed against what he termed the “Gestapo tactics” used by the Chicago police against protestors.  Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a man feared by many, moved toward the stage, being held back by several aids and his son, as he screamed and pointed at the stage, cursing out the senator and, in the colorful metaphors of Chicago, told him to go home. 

Since the 1970s, the nominating convention has slowly lost some of its intrigue and excitement.  After 1976, the candidates are known well in advance and the conventions have taken on the quality of a high school football pep rally.  It is a time where each party chooses speakers and multimedia to express its vision and what it offers for the country in the form of policy or initiatives.  Parties also take the time to point out how the other party is horribly wrong.  There are silly hats, sillier signs and absurd commentary.  To my knowledge, the idea of a convention and all it entails is rather unique with many of the world’s democracies following a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation and without the strong, separate executive branch.  As for the past week in Tampa, the Republicans, from a non-political point of view, offered a well-run spectacle.  Next week, it will be the Democrats and again, I will be glued to the television.