Addiction: we know it’s bad for us, but how hard it is to stop! I’ve had battles with caffeine, sugar, sports ranting with relative success, but in the past month I have had to abandon all three, just to preserve my sanity.

Caffeine was the most obvious one. I stayed up all night twice in a week, and when I was sleeping, it was the wrong time, such as during sermons and when my wife was telling me something important and when the evening news was on.  So I bought some de-caffeinated coffee, and the sleeplessness stopped. I found out the other antidote was afternoon naps.

I beat the sugar habit decades ago, but I have occasional lapses. We went on a cruise in early February, where unlimited drinking was part of the package. Since I am not an alcoholic I enjoyed trying some mixed drinks for my inexperienced palate. It was fun, but I soon began to feel like I was getting a cold. Then the cold started to go away, when I stopped the mixed drinks, and I knew it had been my old nemesis sugar taking hold. Fortunately my sensitivity allows me to drink beer.

I decided to give up “angry writing” for Lent, because it created a permanent seething in me, instead of relieving my anger. I decided to stop ranting about the Cardinals’ not signing another top-of-the-rotation pitcher. A couple of weeks ago I deliberately went on Twitter to chew out the Cardinals’ President of Operations, John Mozeliak, for being too cheap to sign Jordan Montgomery. I’m very good at spending other people’s money.

So I stopped the ranting, and it wasn’t that hard, because the baseball writing at the beginning of Spring Training is so optimistic and hopeful, it is soothing to the soul.

Now political ranting is another thing. My blogs are full of political ranting, even though I always present evidence and counter-arguments. In the last thirty days I have posted twenty political pieces, and I write only about four times a week.  I really try to write on varied topics, but my favorite theme is the political, because, when I read the Op-ed’s and listen to “Morning Joe” on MSNBC every morning, they usually get my juices flowing.

None of these addictions are bad for most people, but I can’t keep up with the Happy Hour crowd, and I have to step back when I am with the ice cream gourmets, because I know I will feel bad tomorrow.  Caffeine is like poison to me, but I spent the first 75 years of my life loving it.  Political writing has become a guilty pleasure since I retired, but I notice it feeds the beast in me. Now I have something nasty to say about the Christian Nationalists every morning.  They may deserve it, but they have become my favorite scapegoat. I don’t like that.

Political writing has stirred up my dualistic self.  Jung would call it the “shadow self.” It’s the”us vs. them” mentality, almost the definition of politics. The professional politicians know how to keep this beast under control. It is a sign of the amateurs getting into politics that divisiveness has become the order of the day.

The dualistic mind is essentially binary, either/or thinking. It knows by comparison, opposition, and differentiation. It uses descriptive words like good/evil, pretty/ugly, smart/stupid, not realizing there may be a hundred degrees between the two ends of each spectrum. Richard Rohr.

Sports fans are a prominently express dualism. They range  from true fanatics to connoisseurs of the game, who can cheer when an opposing outfielder makes a sterling play.  It may take a home run away from the home team, but the educated fan will probably sigh and say, “Good play you f – &^%$. ” It is often said that certain cities have savvy fans, because they appreciate good play, not just plays that favor their home team.

At the other end of the spectrum are the majority of fans who call into sports-talk radio shows. They are usually provoked by the host of the show, who knows the people who listen to him. The callers are all self-proclaimed experts who disagree about everything.  Where two or three sports fanatics are gathered, there are usually six or seven opinions. Avoiding the dualist trap, I will say that most of us are on the spectrum between the connoisseurs and the fanatics.  We are fans, but we love our team, even when they are losing.

Politics has a similar spectrum of experts and self-proclaimed experts. Some want to discuss issues to understand why the opposition thinks differently. Some want to prove their party is better than your party. And all of us in between.

For me politics is complex and needs untangling, so I often want to listen. But don’t get me started about the topics I think I know about: Christianity or public education.  Then you are in for a diatribe with enemies named and scorned.  Lately my anger has waxed about Christian Nationalism. I mean it, don’t get me started.

Nothing creates bitter enemies more than politics and religion, and that is one reason I need to fast from political writing. This is the dualism that hurts others, but it hurts the provocateur as well. In religion, especially, the dualistic mind turns us into self-righteous prigs. As Richard Rohr says

 Most of us settle for quick and easy answers instead of any deep perception, which we leave to poets, philosophers, and prophets. Yet depth and breadth of perception should be the primary arena for all authentic religion. How else could we possibly search for God?

Just as there is nothing wrong with drinking if you are not an alcoholic, there is nothing wrong with political writing unless it turns you into a raving dualist.  Sports ranting and political ranting are not that different. As we say, they generate more heat than light.

To replace the ranting of politics,  I will try to write more affirmative writing: inquiry, reflections, memoir, poetry, that kind of thing. My recent post on “Angry Writing” would qualify in the category of “reflections.” Probably this piece would qualify, as an inquiry into rants and diatribes.

But, to my surprise, my withdrawal from political writing has been much harder than my withdrawal from sports ranting.  Every morning I get incensed by political news and want to spout off about it.  There is evidence of addiction here, evidence that I want the Christian Nationalists to get my message, because they are sooo wrong and self-serving.  Maybe they are, but I probably will not be the one to convince them. I am too incensed.

See? I sneaked a little politics even in my “apolitical” writing. This is going to be a long Lent.