Perceived "Division" Is Better Than Bowing to a Dictator

by Christina Downey, Precinct Chair, Noblesville

On March 15, Indiana Democratic Party central committee members narrowly elected former state senator Karen Tallian to the role of state party Chair. As the 18–14 vote over candidate Destiny Wells revealed, opinion about who should serve as the next state party leader was anything but unanimous—and some of the disagreement evidenced by the close vote has persisted on social media.

I admit that I have not been active enough in state party politics to have any understanding of what swung the vote in Tallian's direction. I am a wife, mother, and full-time-employed educator who has only recently dipped her toes back into local political engagement. (The gut punch of the 2024 election was so distressing that active involvement in anything political had to take a back seat to self-care for a while. I am sure many of you can relate.) However, the fact that the vote was divided doesn't bother me. 

In fact, it gives me hope.

"Democrats divided." "Democrats in disarray." "Democrats directionless." "Democrats disintegrating!" The alliterations are all too tempting for the broadcast media to resist any time individual Dems publicly express intra-party dissension. There's a kernel of truth in these characterizations, in that Republicans hold the Indiana Governor's mansion, supermajorities in the legislature, all statewide offices, and most of our congressional seats.

It's hard out here for the blues. Until we find a way to help the public understand that we are the only party that feels genuine responsibility to try to help regular people and solve tough problems, we're going to sit out here aghast at the harm that voters keep ordering up for themselves.

Media Sensationalism Has Damaged the Public's Understanding of Democracy

However, layered over that kernel of truth is a thick smear of sensationalism. This is not just benign clickbait verbiage, either—this overly simplistic, sports-metaphor framing has contributed to a deadly misshaping of the public understanding of what democracy itself is, and is supposed to be. Let me explain.

In traditional monarchies, the word of the king is holy truth. In authoritarian regimes, the despot defines what is fact, and what is fiction. In both, disputing the adored (or feared) commander is not tolerated. Expressing an opinion that varies from that of the Dear Leader carries grave risk; criticizing the leader themself is heresy and swiftly punished.

Ta da! Unity! Everyone falls in line, personal viewpoints conform to central command, perception itself distorts to match the powerful. Not a division to be found here. Perfection!

I ask myself even as I compose this—was the passage above really sarcasm, as the tone might signal? Or is the traditional media, when they hit Democrats again and again for showing our disagreements rather than falling in blind and deaf lockstep, actually sending the message that the cult-like conformity of the modern Republican Party is the more desirable path?

Division Creates Equilibrium

In a way, it seems inconceivable that in the United States of America, conformity to an autocratic leader would ever be seen as worthy of praise. Our nation's birth required bloodshed to sever away from a monarchic power. Our Founding Fathers, with all their faults, held the Enlightenment ideals of rationality, objective evaluation of evidence, and (most importantly) rigorous intellectual debate as core to the success of a society where the people rule. The industrial and technological dominance of the United States would have been impossible without the rugged spirit of fiercely competitive rivals using data, experimentation, and argument to race to the best ideas. And the structure of our government itself—divided federally into three separate but equal branches, and with power further distributed among states and municipalities in constant competition and tension—shows the power of division to create an overall state of equilibrium.

Division creates balance. Disagreement tests ideas and forges solutions. Debate forces both the contestants and the observers to think hard about the implications of proposed actions. Conformity, by contrast, kills thought, undermines innovation, and gives a free pass to depravity.

Unquestioned Allegiance Is Dangerous

I hate to conclude this, but I believe the media's constant haranguing about division among Democrats has done damage to democracy, and not just to the Democratic Party. The more that Republicans unite behind their strongmen (and strongwomen—but let's be real, y'all, mostly men), the LESS Republicans get criticized for ripping the intellectual fabric that underlies democracy. Their electoral successes get all the attention, blurring how dangerous their unquestioning partisan allegiance is to our democratic system.

So, how about some new terms?

"Republicans in retreat!"

"Republicans receding!"

"Republicans recumbent!"

"Republicans resigned!"

I would much rather be divided—awake, engaged, active, and fighting when it's worth it—than lying prostrate at the feet of Dear Leader.