Post-Partisan George

In politics, as in poetry, tone is fundamental. Citizens expect their governments not only to govern, but to do so with frankness, gravity and calm. Small wonder then that so many Americans are fed up with the ever more strident tone of contemporary politics.

Enter post-partisan politics. Since the two party system only promotes the kind of shrillness we have come to know and loathe, why not go beyond the two party system? The move from partisanship to post-partisanship suggests a grand growing up, a national transition from late adolescence to early adulthood.

But post-partisanship is not without its occupational hazards. In attempting to go beyond the parties, John Kennedy, Jr. and his new, self-declared "post-partisan" monthly George have gone beyond taste, content, and politics itself.

George, Mr. Kennedy writes in the inaugural issue, is meant to "to demystify the political process, to enable [the reader] to see politicians not just as ideological symbols but as lively and enjoyable men and women who shape public life." Thus the magazine's title, the first name of our first president. George Washington, we must grant, does suggest an ideological symbol, whereas George implies a lively man who shaped political life.

George, like John, Jr. himself, is nothing if not fashionable. With Cindy Crawford on its first cover, George features an article about some of the greatest breaches of sartorial decency in recent Washington history. The magazine is chock-full of advertisements for swanky clothes and sensuous perfumes. Post-partisan politics never looked or smelled so good.

George's post-partisanship follows from its emphasis on the personal aspects of political life. George is not interested in the raging issues of our day, from Bosnia to welfare reform. It is, however, enthralled with Teresa Heinz who has now married senators from both parties.

George is contemptuous of partisanship because it is contemptuous of politics. If we all like to eat fine food and drink fine wine, George seems to argue, why can't we just put all this Medicare talk behind us?

George would be somewhat more innocuous if it did not insist on taking itself seriously. "We believe," writes Kennedy, "that if we can make politics accessible by covering it in an entertaining and compelling way, popular interest and involvement in the process will follow," it is hard to imagine that the voyeuristic politics that John, Jr. endorses could ever promote civic virtue. If it accomplishes anything at all, George will convert those who are ironic abut politics to the politics of irony.

George, we ought to bear in mind, is not the only post-partisan act in town. General Colin Powell, in toying with an independent bid for president, also advocates a reconsideration of the traditional two-party system. There is a glaring difference however.

To Powell, the problem is not with politics itself so much as the manner in which the two-party system forces us to link certain issues to others. Powell challenges us to wonder why a fiscal conservative typically aligns himself with a party that opposes a woman's right to an abortion. The general's post-partisanship attempts to remedy the confused and contingent process whereby parties come to stand for the things they do.

Powell wants to move beyond parties to focus on the issues. George wants to move beyond the issues to enjoy a good party. Powell's ideas betray a deep-seeded respect for the power of politics. John, Jr. seems intent to show us that reverent salutes are a thing of his past.

I would not go out and spend the $2.95 it cost to pick up a copy of George. If I have piqued your interest about the magazine, look it up by title in HOLLIS, as I did, and get your hands on the only copy in the entire Harvard library system. You will find it, a victim of the very Irony it espouses, in the Kennedy School of Government.

Samuel J. Rascoff's column appears on alternate Fridays.