A Question of Decency

IF POLLSTERS AND PUNDITS were hoping for a dramatic turn in the political climate of the Democratic party, last week's rally at Government Center left them sorely disappointed. Though Democrats admittedly differ in their levels of liberalism, they still want less bombs and more social services, Ronald Reagan out of the White House, and, as the resounding chants of "Gerr-ee, Ger-ee" illustrated, they want the woman from Queens as their next second-in-command.

What wasn't as evident Wednesday, however--and what remains to be articulated by both Democrats and Republicans in this campaign--is just how far each party is willing to go to get its candidate elected, and to what extent each is willing to compromise its commitment to civilized conduct to do so.

Since the outset of the campaign, both parties have unabashedly conceded that 1984 is a pivotal year in American politics. In fact, it is notably the one point on which both candidates strongly concur. The November election will determine--among other things--whether the world according to Roosevelt is still alive and well, and if the American public is indeed as self-centered as social critics maintain. It is, as Mr. Mondale himself pointed out in San Francisco, more than a contest of personalities; it is, in effect, a contest of two fundamentally different conceptions of what America represents.

Now few would question that those concerned with the upcoming election have a duty to highlight those differences in crystal-clear terms. What is problematic with this campaign, however, and what emerged again Wednesday although in tempered fashion, is a willingness on the part of both parties to excuse vulgarity and pointlessly malicious conduct in the name of a better America.

Comparatively, Wednesday's rally was--as political rallies go--mild-mannered. Supporters screamed. Political hanger-ons oohed and aahed. And, in a welcome departure from their behavior in recent weeks, Republican hecklers actually restrained themselves from disrupting the guest speaker.

Yet the decorum of Wednesday's festivities was, if anything, a veneer. Yes, Reagan supporters slipped quietly in and out of the crowd without jeering, and yes. Democrats refrained from calling Reagan's Christianity into question. Yet those very same Republicans proudly sported signs with grotesque illustrations of fetuses and slogans depicting Ferraro as a bad Catholic, while their so-called issues-oriented counterparts joined in choruses of "Ronald Reagan, he's no good, send him back to Hollywood" and waved signs imploring their cohorts to "Break Ronald Reagan's Arms" in a tasteless pun on his defense policy.

Admittedly, mudslinging and rhetoric has always played a prominent role in elections everywhere. And arguably, the media's excessive assault on Ferraro and her husband this fall was, by comparison to the treatment of candidates like Thomas Eagleton and Edmund Muskie, mild.

More serious than the attacks themselves, though, is the degree to which Wednesday's crowd was willing to condone--and actually seemed to enjoy--the crudity and adolescent jeering. Rally organizers, for example, encouraged supporters to come by telling them that they would need people to counter hecklers. Similarly, instead of calling for a halt to contention and vulgarity, religious leaders like Jerry Falwell actually seem to be inciting such provocation.

THE QUESTION of campaign decency may seem trivial in relation to the broader issues of nuclear war and taxes, but in terms of maintaining credibility and confidence, political leaders must assure the public that they are not inciting--or even tacitly supporting--campaigns targeted at maliciously destroying individuals. It is a question that needs to be addressed, and before voters take to the polls.

Walter Mondale is correct when he maintains this is a pivotal election. Yet what sort of precedents we set on issues are no more important than those we set on style. Political activism is healthy and commendable: zealous vulgarity and personal exploitation in the name of victory are not. And that is something that both parties--regardless of who wins in November--need to make clear.