The word “politicize” has become fairly common in the media, especially since Obama took office. It’s often used to deride the president for taking social issues and making them a problem of government to further his own agenda. This would make sense if the targeted issues were completely mundane. The truth is, social issues are almost always going to be political issues. And in some cases, such as the issue of race, the roots of these political issues actually precede the existence of our country. Over the last few years, the term “politicize” has been used almost exclusively to talk about race and climate issues. So what does it really mean to “politicize” an issue?
To politicize is to turn broad social issues into, essentially, ideological checklists for each party. Viewpoints for totally independent ideas like abortion and climate change are generalized to fit within the confines of a mass ideology. The two dominant parties create this binary way of thinking, which affects an artificial interaction between the public and the issues at hand. Say, for instance, that you have a person who is pro-industry and maybe not so keen on civil rights. Through these views they become associated with the Republican party. Because of the Republican party’s stance on climate change, this person is more likely to deny climate change simply because it fits into the overall ideology of their party. What ends up happening is the discussion on climate change degenerates into a showdown between liberals and conservatives that has very little to do with the actual scientific research.
Essentially, through the sharing of specific opinions, a person shifts their overall bias to fit the agenda of the group they support. Issues exist more as points of tension between political parties. It makes us think that science-based issues, with years of research supporting their conclusions, should be made into a national discussion among the public.
No scientist is going to study and understand climate change by asking the public how they feel about it. They’re going to do it by measuring ocean and atmospheric temperatures and compare the amounts over time. Research done by experts in any subject is rendered useless because politicizing an issue is to treat genuine research as a supporting bullet point. The reality behind all this hard work is warped when presented before a divided public. Studies on race or the economy are discredited simply because the people feel it’s not true or the party tells them it’s not true. As the general public has no way to gauge the truth of any statement, we simply agree with what appeals to us.
Hilariously, this is kind of what drives all media nowadays. Everyone is trying to explain what the reality of the situation is. Think of how many media outlets there are that don’t focus on telling the news as it is, but rather focus on explaining why you should have a specific opinion on the subject. This constant stream of debate and justification doesn’t ever need to be fact-based — as long as it’s in the spirit of the party (or lack thereof), it’ll appease voters.