7 minute read
A Tale of Two Shows: What The West Wing and House of Cards Tell Us About the Modern Political Climate
by caldems
By Aryan Deorah duty. When they have disagreements, they tend to Staff Writer work them out in a civil manner through maintaining Oftentimes, what makes a good show on TV great is The West Wing ran from 1999 to 2006 and directly the ability to relate to it, to imagine yourself as one commented on the major events and issues of the era, of the characters and/or to imagine yourself living in from increasing partisanship to greater terror threats that world, and to be able to draw similarities between in a post Cold -wWar America. In the show, despite the fiction and your personal reality. These qualities setbacks and challenges, logical reasoning and proare what made both Aaron Sorkin’s The West Wing gressive values reign supreme. One of the best examand Beau WIllimon’s House of Cards award-winning ples of the show working to diffuse social tensions and shows with massive fan bases and references ingrained unite Americans was the first episode of season threeinto pop-culture. The twose shows address many of the same hot subjects in American politics: White supremacy, terrorism, gridlock, greed, abortion, war, and many more. “All in all, these similarities between Trump and Underwood are a testaHowever, they address these subjects in vastlysubjects ment to the corruption in American vastly different ways., The West Wing spun things in a positive light: when one of these issues appeared, the politics today. However, there is hope, main characters followed the principle of good gover- because politicians similar to Jed nance and acted in the best interest of the American people. House of Cards took an opposite view: it de- Bartlett--steadfast, empathetic, and picted people acting solely in their best interests and productive--do exist in the political doing whatever it takes to win, scraping the bottom of the barrel in regards to morals and corruption. field, even when politics seem grim.” For too many, what they binge on Netflix and watch play out on the nightly news are seperate, but these an open dialogue. shows not only are reflections of the world they were -the first one to air after 9/11. In the episode, during made in, they each have shaped a generation of atti- a lockdown in the White House, Deputy Chief of Staff tudes towards politics and have had tangible effects on Josh Lyman instructed a group of school children the American political climate. They influence our de- on religious extremism, emphasizing the point that sires about the world we want to live in as well as our Al-Queda is not representative of Islam as a whole. fears about the ones we live in now. Jed Bartlett and The show directly comments on how AQ is to Islam Frank Underwood may not be real, but the personas what the KKK is to Christianity and acknowledges they evoke in our minds certainly are. that white nationalism is a far greater threat to AmerRight off the bat, The West Wing starts on an uplift- icans than Islamic terrorist groups. ing note. The opening theme manages to convey the The show was a product of a different era in Ameriimportance of the decision making that takes place can politics, one in which polarization was not great in the White House while making viewers patriotic. enough to prevent social and political progress. PoliMuch of the show focuses on the cheerful relation- ticians could work together across the aisle and reach ships between the White House staff as they deal with compromises for the betterment of the American the daily buzz of American politics. All the characters people. The show featured multiple examples of bicrack light humor and enjoy their jobs, viewing the partisanship, from a Democrat choosing a Republican embetterment of the American people as their sacred as Secretary of State, to a Republican Speaker of the
16
Advertisement
House service as acting President when the President’s daughter is kidnapped, to both parties working together to save Social Security from its eventual failure. In each of these scenarios, politicians put their country over their party, and when they did, they were able to effectively deal with challenging situations. As we live in a time where partisanship grows worse andworse and worse and the White House seems to care only about one thing, itself, many liberals look to tThe West Wing as a source of comfort. When people
are fed up with their reality, it is often nice to take a step back and pretend that Jed Bartlett is out there, fighting for what is best for us. His collective presence in our minds allows us to believe that we can have a better future and a better political system--, and reminds us that it doesn’t have to be divisivelike this. House of Cards set a far darker, more menacing tone. The opening scene of House of Cards featured the main character, House Majority Whip Frank Underwood, suffocating a dog who was just run over. In his first monologue, he broke the fourth wall, something he did often throughout the series, talking and talked about the necessity of decisiveness and doing the unpleasant thing. This scene existed as the metaphor for a chaotic Washington, in which you need to be brutal and willing to do the unthinkable things just to survive, precisely how Frank Underwood behaved on his rise to power. There was a big fish mentality prevailing in the politics of House of Cards. It was either kill or be killed, and as you make your way up the ranks, the risk of any action is higher. If you don’t fall in line behind those above you, your career is over. Everyone has done something terrible, something that would end their career if anyone found out, and whoever controls this knowledge controls the capitol. What was striking is how little politicians focus on the issues, and instead focusing on maintaining or growing their power while destroying their rivals and enemies. Another striking thing was that politicians and journalists who trust others and care about doing the right thing often suffer, or even die, because of it, commenting on the lack of trust in politics. Donald Blythe, arguably the one character who cared about doing what is best, is widely regarded as a fool and an idiot, and his career is ended by the Underwoods, ending with neither with fame noror fortune. Many essential characters from journalists Zoe Barnes and Lucas Goodwin, Congressman Peter Russo, and writer Tom Yates were killed due to their search for the truth about the Underwoods and desire to make it public. Eventually it all came crashing down like a house of cards once Underwood’s role in the scandal that propelled him to the presidency., but before then, the damage that one man’s quest for power could do to so many and to the country as a whole is astounding. The whole show was a commentary on what the absence of morals and trust from our politics can do to the country. There are several concerning parallels that can be drawn between Frank Underwood and Donald Trump. Underwood called scandals against him conspiracy theories, while Trump has his signature “fake news,”, showing both often undercut the media and discredit those who negatively report on them. Underwood circumvented congress by declaring a national emergency to employ his unpopular AmericaWorks policy, while Trump did the same thing in order to build the border wall, displaying how both showing both seem willing to push the limits of the presidential power and do whatever it takes to get their way. Underwood was shot by the boyfriend of someone he murdered, while Trump has been hospitalized thanks to a pandemic he consistently downplayed and let spread, meaning both have been sent to the hospital over demons of their own creation. Most notably, Underwood rigged a presidential election through spreading terror at voting sites and discrediting its results, and it seems Trump is willing to do the same. Through a number of tactics, such as hacking election results, coordinating terrorist attacks on poll sites in swing states, and sewing fear and distrust of the results in the minds of his supporters and politicians in his party, Underwood was able to convince state secretary of states not to certify election results, leading to no one reaching a majority of electoral votes and moving the fate of the election to Congress. Through his so-called “poll watchers” and his order to white supremicist groups to “stand back, and stand by”, Trump may be planning to intimidate voters and cause chaos in liberal polling places in swing states. His overt intention to discredit mail in voting and even potentially seize “fraudulent” ballots may lead to an eerily familiar situation. If state secretaries of states refuse to certify election results, we may be in an unprecedented scenario, something that would make the election of 2000 look like light tumble.
