Why is there division? The simple answer is because people disagree about things. People have always disagreed about things and always will disagree about things. Some of those things are inconsequential —who is the best rock band of all time?; who would win a bout between heavyweight boxing champions of different eras?; is pineapple an appropriate topping for pizza? While other disagreements reflect fundamental beliefs about the world — should everyone be treated equally under the law?; are some classes of people worth intrinsically less than others?; should everyone have access to affordable healthcare? The former, minor, disagreements can exist without jeopardizing friendships, how you think about the latter, major disagreements says a lot about the type of person that you are.
Recently I have seen the claim that divisions among us are somehow caused from some outside source. For years I have seen the finger pointed at "the media"; politicians get the blame as well, the latest was that it was the "shadow government", also known as "the cabal". I'll concede that some media feed off divineness because it gives them something to report on. I'll concede that billionaires love to see us squabbling about petty bullshit because it distracts us from their tax financed empire building. I'll concede that some politicians need to foster discord because it makes them look like they're accomplishing something, that they're fighting for us. But despite my concessions on these points, I believe that divisiveness is simply the result of there being positions for which there doesn't seem to be a middle ground.
Abortion is a stark example. For most of those who are against abortion it's no less than murder. No amount of compromise by the pro-choice side will convince them that abortion, at any point in the pregnancy, for any reason, is anything other than the killing of a human being. Pro-choice advocates can argue for a woman's bodily autonomy, dangers to women's health is some cases, even pointing out to those with religious objections that The Bible doesn't actually prohibit abortion or equate it with murder, but they won't budge.
But there are many other areas where there is apparently no compromise.
Most of the areas where there is a clear black or white, day or night difference involve who deserves simple human rights. One can support border security and vetting of immigrants without advocating for a government agency running rampant in the streets, shooting and killing people, or for the administration arbitrarily canceling legal avenues of attaining citizenship. A sincere argument might be able to be made for banning someone whose male biology presents an unfair advantage competing against female athletes without assuming that transgender people are "pretending" to be something they're not, or are mentally ill. We can support politicians that push back against the current iteration of corporate capitalism, championing policies that value individuals' health and well-being rather than the bottom line without being tarred as communists. Yet cheerleaders for one "side" are fine with shooting people in the street and breaking up families; they push for making it difficult if not impossible for transgender people to live the lives they choose; they prefer that children starve rather than budget more for food assistance programs.
That's why there's division.
No one is forcing them to believe as they do — no one is forcing us either. We all believe what we do because that's what we want to believe. And I want to be divided from people who devalue human life and prioritize religion or racial purity over people. I have no problem being friends with someone with whom I disagree about property taxes, or term limits, or student loan forgiveness. I do have a problem with you if you support shooting people in the streets who aren't actively threatening harm. I do have a problem with you if you think getting beaten up is an appropriate response for speaking against a politician I do have a problem with you if you're a bigot.
What's crazy though, is some people have a problem with us for not being okay with beating people exercising First Amendment rights, for not being okay with shooting people in the streets, for not being a bigot. These same people believe that the problem with divisiveness is not so much that it exists, but that we have been persuaded by some outside force to be divided from them. Compromise or consensus isn't the answer for them, but acquiescing to their world view. This is similar to the Trumpist view of bipartisanship — not that both parties come to a mutually acceptable solution to the issue of the day, but that the other party bowing to his position.
There are plenty of my fellow Americans that I am perfectly happy to be divided from.
No comments:
Post a Comment