We’ve forgotten there is a line between partisanship and patriotism. The gray area in between used to be called statesmanship.
The media, politicians, internet trolls and pundits quickly draw lines based on political persuasion alone. A person’s morality is sometimes even judged based solely on political inclinations. People either get attacked or praised based on a broad label.
People too often consider the party affiliation attached to a commentator, political pundit or legislator as a way of determining whether they agree with the article, opinion or legislation rather than judging the merits of the content. Some people would rather win than solve a problem.
Many are no longer polite about it either. It seems a label is more important than the merits of an argument. But the average American in polite society doesn’t share this new paradigm. Average Americans understand gradations in between.
The best perspective I’ve ever seen about average American political thought in this regard was summed up by author Nassim Taleb, who wrote a book entitled “Skin in the Game” that challenges long held beliefs.
Taleb said, “I am, at the fed level, Libertarian; at the state level, Republican; at the local level, Democrat; and at the family and friends’ level, a socialist. If that saying doesn’t convince you of the fatuousness of left vs. right labels, nothing will.” He has a point.
This is actually how most Americans operate. When Ronald Reagan quipped to his doctors after being shot that he hoped they were Republicans, the doctor replied that for the moment, they were all Republicans while they were caring for him. Because in that moment, politics didn’t matter. Everyone shouldn’t be totally defined by any single element of their being whether it is politics, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or anything else.
You see, we really don’t care about the political inclinations of our neighbor for the most part. Everyone understands that a breadth of ideas is healthy. Most Americans simply want to see politicians who are divided along the patriotic line and not the partisan line. We don’t want to know if you are Democrat or Republican. We want to know if you’re for America or against it. There are plenty of patriots on both sides of the aisle. Most Americans just want to know who is going to support freedom.
Taleb is right in so many ways. For the most part, we each hold varying beliefs dependent on the circumstance of the issue. Everyone doesn’t think exactly alike. But we all should have the same goal, for our fellow man and America to succeed. We might disagree on the best way to accomplish that goal. We may argue. But we can disagree without being disagreeable.
Contentious issues are contentious because there is wide argumentative space in between. Unfortunately, most people expose their perceptual biases rather than seek solutions. To quote Game of Thrones’ Lord Varys, many would see this country burn if they could be king of the ashes. For practical purposes, you don’t always want to soundly defeat someone simply because of opposing views. A defeated adversary that isn’t going away will want to reclaim the victory. A mutually acceptable solution is a more advisable strategy.
Recently, President Obama advised at the Obama Foundation summit in Chicago that the politically “woke” should get over it. He wasn’t going so far as to support President Trump. But he did target the “callout culture” of social media and Democratic leftists who are not accessible to other points of view in the least.
President Obama’s comments sparked fierce debate among Democrats. Though he neither endorsed total resistance to President Trump nor pursuing a more centrist approach, his point was clear. No one brings about change by simply resisting and finding fault in everything your opponent does. President Obama has a point as well.
It’s a point Republicans hopefully understand. It’s a point Washington Democrats are going to ignore.
