Surprised by Politicized 'Joy'—An Ode to Decode

Vice President Kamala Harris “does it all with a sense of joy.” That’s how her running-mate, Governor Tim Walz, has described the current campaign of “happy warriors.”

Their opponent, former President Donald Trump, briefly evoked exuberance in an August 14 speech. He promised his audience that “every day will be filled with opportunity, hope, and joy”—so long as they “never let [Harris] get anywhere near the White House.”

Trump’s grumpier approach to happiness—his salesman-like focus on a “burning platform” for which he’s the ideal firefighter—had already prompted TV’s Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough to summarize the two candidacies. The Democrats reflect “hope and optimism,”  he said, and the Republicans show “dourness and anger.”

Beloved Christian author  C.S. Lewis (1898-1963), whose many books included Surprised by Joy, might have balked at such casual descriptions and distinctions now common in secular American politics.

Lewis once called joy “the serious business of heaven,” cautioning against extended earthly embraces of festive “dance and game.” Appeals to “frivolous” optimism are “unimportant down here,” he wrote, “for ‘down here’ is not their natural place.”

We still should defend joy. It’s not a bad thing, and the Lord knows we need to experience it before our eternal reward. It’s one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22), not just a free sample for shoppers in the marketplace of ideas.

One can expect it to be a theme, or at least the tone, of the 2024 Democratic National Convention, starting August 19.

Recall that attendees at the Republican Convention last month showed authentic joy about their candidate, who had just survived an assassination attempt. They also danced to country music and applauded the showmanship of Hulk Hogan.

Episodes of delight bring people together and boost their resilience. A journalist for Politico opined that “the joyful aspect” of the Harris-Walz campaign helps them to “not get bogged down in the attacks which are coming on them.”

But we can acknowledge that joy is most meaningful as “an unsatisfied desire” which points beyond itself, toward the real bliss to which God invites us, according to Lewis. We dare not make the world’s escapism our false idol if we believe that, one day, we will escape.

This long-term view is akin to Aristotle’s description of true happiness: the one thing you can choose for itself. “Everything else is selected for the sake of happiness,” as noted by the Magis Center, a Catholic  website about faith and reason.  

Our task is to decide wisely where we shall seek and find the fulfillment called happiness. Perhaps in hedonism or egotism. Better choices would be a contributive life or a loving relationship with God and others, Magis recommends.

These are high-minded ideals which challenge us to think critically and elevate our perspectives.

Sadly, many folks have a more mundane reading of the “pursuit of happiness” promised in the Declaration of Independence. And “joy” now has a dubious role as a popular buzzword in the marketing of food products and luxury items.

A strategy called “joy marketing” drew attention from Advertising Age back in 2015. The makers of Reddi-Wip hired a psychologist to help them sell whipped topping, and they created ads exclaiming, “Share the Joy!”

Other companies also sought psychological help based on a finding that “93% of Americans want to find more ways to experience joy,” the newspaper reported. Fully 83% “would like to experience small amounts of joy daily vs. larger, occasional doses.”

Marketing Scoop commented this year that we’ve seen many more examples of feel-good marketing. Think of the “I’m Lovin’ It” campaign McDonald’s adopted. Burger King tells us, “Have It Your Way! You Rule!”

Joy is in danger of being dumbed down.

Especially these days, when so many people are suffering from depression, anxiety, stress, isolation, and polarization, we naturally want to bring some delight into others’ lives right now.

Politics has become a space for offering respite or revenge in a culture of victimhood and quick complaint. As noted by comedian Chris Rock, society has become an “emergency room” full of people with paper cuts. It’s tempting to resolve grievances with hefty doses of affirmation and occasional pandering.

But C.S. Lewis would advise people to question government handouts of joy by citing life’s inevitable ups and downs, summoning a sense of solidarity with a recognition that we all carry crosses. In light of the diligence we must cultivate, we can be forgiven for occasional outbreaks of grumpiness.

Happiness stands as a counterpoint to the sacrifices and tough choices we must make although we prefer easy answers. Suffering deepens and sweetens the message of joy, making it less propagandistic, more realistic, and prone toward community-building.

St. Francis of Assisi (1181-1226) is known for his philosophy of “perfect joy”: Even those who suffer an offense or marginalization can survive when an opportunity for earthly joy has gone awry. They can become more keenly aware of the superior sweetness which awaits them.

This awareness is most fruitful when both the bestower and the recipient participate.  

For example, a Franciscan residence where humility is lacking might erroneously become “closed to the poor and forsaken, to those who knock uninvited and unwanted at the friary door,” as explained at the Franciscan Media website.

Once the residents have grown in humility, however, “the friars have learned to see their own brokenness, their jealousy, their desire for power. And they have learned to forgive that in themselves and in each other.” They can laugh at themselves, develop perfect joy, and welcome the stranger. That makes their friary “a healing place for others.”

This is a lesson for politicians—and voters. If we don’t adopt a more forgiving and people-centered mind frame, joy shrinks to a marketing gimmick that can’t be deeply shared.

The Judeo-Christian call to accompany others on their life journeys requires understanding their pleasures and pains, as well as cooperatively choosing paths toward hope and change. For politicians, this demands honest clarity about policy proposals and the reasoning behind them.

Voters are now turning to presidential campaigners Harris and Trump for more details of their plans, plus transparency regarding their perspectives. Next steps must include not only debates between the candidates, but also lively deliberations among Americans, fostered by the news media.

It's not sufficient for aspiring leaders to exchange insults which enrage and engage electoral warriors. Likewise, it’s silly to recruit warriors with pacifying messages like “You Rule!” or “Share the Joy!”.

Voters should settle for neither political condemnations of “victimizer” groups nor politicians’ vows that they have America’s best interests at heart.

Tokens of goodwill are inadequate in 2024. Our imminent decisions are complicated by fundamental differences in how one defines America and its proper trajectory among powerful global movements. Think of such catchphrases as “oppressor vs. oppressed” and “you will own nothing and be happy.”

Louis Brandeis (1856-1941), who served as an associate justice of the US Supreme Court for more than two decades early in the 20^th century, warned about easy answers based on good intentions, whether they’re evinced by smiles or smirks, whether they spring from expertise, gut instinct, or focus group findings.

"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent,” he said. “Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding". (emphasis added)

The urgency of Brandeis’s wisdom has grown at our “moment in time” when emotions and social-media videos, often centered on promises of joy, are all too dominant in our thought patterns.

Many of today’s appeals to mere optimism echo the old General Electric slogan, “Progress is our most important product.” Members of the Baby Boom generation (including Trump, born in 1946, and Harris, born in 1964) grew up with this ethos.

Both candidates need to scrutinize their own worldviews. The allure of progress is similar to the allure of joy. Both must be seen in a bigger context of short-term realism and long-term purpose, as Lewis told us.

Another great Christian author, G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936), agreed that secular societies set oversimplified goals. “Progress,” he wrote, “is a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative.”

In other words, we in this secular age must determine our answer to the pressing question Jesus asked in Mark 10:36. “What do you wish me to do for you?”

The political observations above are intended not as judgments against particular campaigns or parties, but as thoughts to help us decode what joy might mean when it pops up in political news headlines.

Clearly, the word captures something humanity craves at this time, at all times. We have witnessed that its impact is limited when God is banned from competing in the public square.

Dismissing “the serious business of heaven” makes our thinking less coherent, our ideas less compelling, our society less compassionate, our spirits less buoyant, and substantive change less likely. Or maybe the chance of change has grown more likely, given this world increasingly poised to pivot.

Thank goodness, we can still be “happy warriors,” staying anchored amid today’s mix of danger and occasional delight. When we embrace a robust pursuit of happiness, it creates an informative and formative framework for our lives. The pursuit might even spark fruitful political discussions. We should sing an ode to joy, hopefully within earshot of our future leaders.

Image from ClipSafari.com, a collection of Creative Commons designs.

Phronesis Plus

Welcome behind the paywall, where you’l find premium content for “Phronesis in Pieces.” In this edition, a bonus article: Consider it an old-school “sidebar” analysis, adding more particular critiques to the commentary on “joy” above.

Keep Calm and Try Kamala? Or Retry Trump?

Our country’s need to properly apply key principles of joy during this year’s campaign for the White House prompts a deeper, non-partisan dive into our experiences so far with the two leading candidates—Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.

Harris has started to share some of the perspectives which we can expect to see in her policy proposals. While her recent statement of economic plans provided specifics, we can make constructive observations here about more general themes having to do with personal feelings and values. They are likely to surface in a variety of social-policy areas.

She spoke in July during an on-stage dialogue at the Essence Festival of Culture. Ironically, a clip from these comments was soon weaponized as an example of “word salad.”

The festival host asked her how matters of government policy could be informed by culture in order to empower people for constructive change. In the clip that went viral, Harris responded that culture shows how we feel about “our moment in time”; we should search our feelings for “reflection[s] of joy” because it “comes in the morning” (referencing one translation of Psalms 30:6).

In the next, seldom-seen video segment (see the link above), Harris went on to prescribe “having language and a connection to how people are experiencing life.” Leaders must understand how “anything they say affects a real human being.”

They should ask “how does this affect a child?” in order to fully formulate a policy, she said. “Culture helps us do that.”

Harris added, “Some people would suggest it’s a sign of strength [to show] who you beat down,” but, “I think most of us know the real sign of strength is based on who you lift up.”

Her salad contained good ingredients but suffered from what CS Lewis might have called an incomplete, secularized recipe. She seemed to accentuate what voters are feeling and experiencing at the moment, as measured by polls and advocacy groups, rather than more integral challenges and the greater good.

Harris’s mentions of concern for children, hope for tomorrow, and the respectful use of strength were sound as far as they went. But they missed key reference points for joy-maximization—recognition of every soul’s dignity and destiny, repair of our cultural blind spots, and pursuit of deeper meanings and truths. Advocates for a culture of life will rightly question how far she wants to go in protecting children.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s frequent promises to rescue Americans from “burning platforms” in the policy arena, such as immigration woes, inflation, and lawfare, demonstrate how he has lots of fun at his rallies but rarely strikes notes of joy. He does not dig consistently into detailed action plans, although he and his rally-goers probably would agree that they know where he stands.

He largely sets aside the reference points for “perfect joy” taught by St. Francis—humility, forgiveness, willingness to learn, and withdrawal from ego and power games.

Even his survival after an assassination attempt, a blessing filled with foretastes of wonder, providence, and renewal, has not prompted the rhetorical course corrections which many expected. He dwells more on a past full of accomplishments than on future scenarios which deserve more detailed discussion.

Plenty of critics challenge the truthfulness of his statements, which tend to be simplified and prone toward superlatives. One could argue, however, that the question of honesty is more complicated than journalistic fact-checking alone can address. A possible tool for analysis is this: When is a candidate using words to make a point that’s heartfelt, and when is a candidate using words to score a point with counterfactuals?

As a former tycoon and celebrity, Trump wants loyalty to his ideas, to his brand. He has adopted policies that honor some conservative values, Christian family virtues, and practices supportive of patriotism. However, his approach to “populism” elevates the prosperity of various “audience” segments above the prospering of individual souls.

Harris seems less focused on the individualism built into capitalist economies and more committed to a political machine built to generate “voters”—identifiable groups of voters. Her campaign has hosted many large on-line gatherings for such groups as LGBTQ, women, and white men, for example.

She is more comfortable with the notion of progress, despite G.K. Chesterton’s warning that one must ask the question: progress toward what?

Certainly, both parties have far to go in elaborating on these ideas and many more. Terms need to be defined more candidly. Each candidate’s past activities need to be explored more fully to understand perspectives and promote discernment. Part of this is the work of candidates and the news media.

But part of the burden rests on Americans who must engage with politicians’ comments using reason, faith, common sense, and lifetimes of experience, not merely emotions, impressions, or optimistic confirmation bias.

One should note that neither candidate is talking much about religion and its implicationss for people’s lives. It appears only vice presidential candidate Tim Walz has mentioned the “golden rule.” Using it as an applause-line tactic, this governor of Minnesota recently said the rule is: “Mind your own damn business!.”

Governor Walz, as a fact-checker for others, isn’t that a noteworthy case of disinformation?

The Premium Section of “Phronesis”—Updated All Year

In “Phronesis Plus,” find additional new material via the navbar, especially the abundant Bookshelf of resources. Links were added in July and are added every month, in such categories as books, podcasts, online research, statistics, and quotable quotes of interest to avocational students of phronesis.