The 2000's have been a crazy decade haven't they? Bush v Gore. 9/11. Afganistan. Iraq. Kerry. Cheney. Hillary. McCain. Obama. Financial Meltdowns. Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Health Care. What's happened in our country? Why can't we all get along? Why are we so polarized?
Living here in Northern California, I listen to NPR all day, I watch Jon Stewart and Bill Maher on my DVR, and I wake up everyday feeling like everyone around me believes the same things I do. I feel like I've settled in nicely to a set of beliefs about economics, politics, and in a lot of ways, morality. When I look around me, I see the world through a lens that I've created and it's so easy to tell myself that everything I think is right and everything on the "other side" is wrong. I don't know why I've gotten to this point and I want to find out.
I've toyed with the idea of starting a blog for a while now, but I never quite thought I had anything that anyone else would want to read or follow. I talk to the TV or radio when I'm alone and I know what I say, but after frustrations subside, I think I'm just plain saddened by the fact that we can't have a good old fashioned debate about issues without it degenerating into a game of spin on both sides. I LOVE to have intellectual conversations. I love to play devil's advocate and debate and argue. I love asking questions. so... maybe this could be a vehicle for my own enjoyment.
So... How did I get to here, writing my first post on Blogger? Well, this morning I made a comment to an old friend's facebook status update and over the course of half an hour 20 or 30 comments streamed in from his friend list. (Full disclosure: my old friend is on "the other side" and most of his facebook friends are, too). Some people expounded on ideals, some got mad, some were conciliatory, some flamed mean things. I've posted my thoughts on his facebook page many times, mostly hoping to learn more from the "other side" but in today's political climate, I'm sure many of his friends thought of me as "the other side" and I never quite got what I wanted. So, in a moment of brilliance (to myself anyway), I posited the question, "Which should I read first, The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged?" The response, "The Fountainhead's a better read, but Atlas Shrugged is more relevent to today's times" Aye-Aye, Capn'!
After work I drove over to Borders to pick it up. I called my best friend and asked him the same question. His response was shocking. He laughed and said, "Neither! Everyone who I know who's read either turns into an a**hole for 6 months. Read Friedman or Adam Smith." Wait a second... What is in this book? I don't want to read about dry economics, I get that. I want to get to something deeper. I want to learn about the morality that's contained in it. Why should I be afraid of a book?
So I go inside and pick it up. JEEZ this thing is dense. Now I need to tell you I don't read enough for pleasure. I read news, I read on the internet, but I don't really sit down and read. I was all of a sudden worried that I wouldn't have the gumption to follow through with this plan.
On my drive home, it hits me. Like the movie "Julie and Julia"- I would blog the adventure. I'll use a public forum to inspire me to keep to it. I'll ask for motivation to stay the course. Maybe people might enjoy coming along for the ride. Or, maybe this will become something else. Maybe, just maybe, this blog could become a forum for discussions and ideas and become a way for people on both sides to learn about what the other side thinks. If we can get a better perspective through an honest conversation, maybe we can start to find that common ground.
Ok, I'm a liberal intellectual idealist. That can't happen. Can it?
Join me?
3 comments:
There are many ways to view the divide between liberals and conservatives. There is evidence that personality and brain wiring cause the difference. There is a theory that it is primarily a linguistic/cognitive phenomenon. And of course, there's always the idea that the other side is a bunch of idiots. I'd like to start off with a bit of an olive branch; it's clear to me that both sides are equally necessary.
Sociologically, I think it's important that both liberals and conservatives exist. There are numerous examples in history showing the tragedy that can happen when one side becomes silenced. For instance, consider the Great Leap forward. Mao decided that progress was the most important thing for China in the late 50s, and so he embarked on a program of changing China from a rural farming society to an industrial manufacturing economy. In a democratic society, conservative voices would have rung out, shouting the dangers of such a drastic change. But because he was the HNIC and didn't have anyone to answer to, he plowed ahead with the plan, which resulted in millions of deaths due to famine. As an example of what happens when progressive and liberal voices are extinguished, present day Africa shows what life without a safety net looks like.
No one of us has the right answer to any complex question about where society should be. The correct answer bubbles up as an emergent phenomenon due to the interaction between progressive and conservative forces in society. If change is needed, a few people will tip toward one side; if we've gotten into trouble and need to protect ourselves, a few will tip back the other way. I like to think of society as a beast of burden pulling a boulder. If the rock is too heavy, no work gets done; if the beast is too strong, it'll run away and get somewhere it shouldn't be.
In conclusion, none of you are right. Your voice is just one insignificant opinion in a sea of drivel. Like the stock market, the market of free ideas settles pretty close to what the correct answer should be most of the time. However, democracy, much like free market capitalism, is prone to market failures. But, that's a subject of a different post.
Vive la difference!
Maybe YOU are the other side.
Good luck
I think that your comments, Ringo, are quite astute. Both "sides" have important and pratical ideas that need to come into the conversation. By starting this whole experiment of understanding, I find it comforting that we can at least start from a place where we can recognize that only together can we really create and build policy that "works" in the real world. Most Americans describe themselves as "centrists" and I think if each polar group can learn about the virtues of the other pole we can do better and defining the "center".
Andrew- you are 100% correct. Many would look at me as "the other side". My goal with this discussion is to create a civil forum where I can empirically learn more about my "other side" and at the same time give a forum for other's to learn about their "other side". Sides are only in the eye of the beholder and my gut feeling is that we really don't have "sides" at all. I can't wait for some objectivists or conservatives to join in the conversation. There's always a middle ground.
Post a Comment