Iain Duncan Smith: 'Over the years the political establishment has frowned if a mainstream politician mentions marriage.'

Over the years the political establishment has frowned if a mainstream politician mentions marriage.

In his quote, Iain Duncan Smith astutely observes the reluctance of mainstream politicians to discuss marriage over the years. This observation provides insight into the shifting landscape of political discourse and the societal value placed on the institution of marriage. However, in exploring this quote, let us venture into the realm of philosophy to introduce a concept that may give it a unique perspective.Marriage has long been a cornerstone of human society, serving as a symbol of commitment, love, unity, and stability. It is an institution that carries profound meaning for individuals and communities alike. Yet, despite its enduring significance, mainstream politicians often shy away from openly discussing it. This reticence from the political establishment is noteworthy as it reflects a broader societal trend where matters relating to interpersonal relationships may not be given the attention they deserve.To delve deeper into the importance of discussing marriage in political discourse, we can turn to the concept of "Communal Relationships" put forth by philosopher Michael E. Smith. Communal Relationships are grounded in a shared sense of identity, mutual support, and interdependence. Such relationships extend beyond the individual, encompassing families, communities, and society as a whole. Smith argues that societies with strong communal relationships tend to be more resilient and cohesive.Marriage, in its essence, embodies a form of communal relationship. It fosters a bond between two individuals who commit to sharing their lives, supporting and relying upon each other, and often starting a family together. By endorsing and promoting marriage, politicians can contribute to the cultivation of communal relationships within society. This, in turn, fosters stability and unity, allowing communities to thrive.However, the hesitance of mainstream politicians to discuss marriage suggests a departure from the recognition and prioritization of communal relationships. Perhaps in an era of heightened individualism, societal focus has shifted towards personal freedoms and rights at the expense of valuing the unity and stability that marriage symbolizes.This hesitance may also stem from the fear of alienating certain voters or endorsing a particular value system. Political correctness and a desire to be all-inclusive might discourage politicians from openly discussing marriage and recognizing its societal importance. However, by doing so, we risk undermining the significance of an institution that has historically played a vital role in shaping our communities.It is important to note that advocating for marriage does not imply disregarding or marginalizing other forms of relationships. By acknowledging the value of marriage, politicians can embrace a holistic view of interpersonal relationships and promote a society where all diverse forms of bonds are celebrated and respected.In conclusion, Iain Duncan Smith's quote aptly highlights the hesitance of mainstream politicians to discuss marriage. Exploring this observation through the lens of Communal Relationships allows us to recognize the potential consequences of overlooking this important institution. By engaging in meaningful conversations about marriage, mainstream politicians can contribute to the safeguarding of communal bonds and, ultimately, foster a more stable and cohesive society.