8/14/23
Everyone has to come to their own decisions. You cannot coerce people into doing what they don’t want. It will work on the surface and might even get cooperation in the moment, but for those things that go against a person’s internal instincts, it will be fleeting. Such is the case with religion, politics and certainly, love; ask Bonnie Raitt.
So when you look at the state of political discourse today, you have to ask yourself why so much is left to coercion versus persuading? Is it that the success of negative campaigning and the vilifying of opponents has become so pervasive that reason and civil discourse have now been relegated to the dust bin? With the short attention spans of most consumers of information, the ability to get a cogent argument across on a complicated topic such as abortion, it is difficult and maybe even impossible to break through to consider an alternative position.
Still, the option of using physical force is an abhorrent for the time being. Most people of both persuasions do not want armed conflict to determine an outcome. Despite the rhetoric thrown by sides of the political divide, I don’t see real people coming with pitch forks for those with whom they disagree….for now. Should our esteemed leaders and the media continue to ratchet up that rhetoric, all bets are off as there are any number of people on both sides ready for a fight. Certainly the actions regarding Covid inoculation came dangerously close as people lost their jobs over a shot.
A recent piece in the Federalist about the Spanish Civil War was a stark reminder of how quickly things can spiral out of control. There thousands of religious were killed simply because they opposed the state’s policies. Rather than trying persuasion, the topics were too close to the dogmas of the religious to have any chance of compromise and therefore, why bother. Instead, they harassed, jailed and killed those who resisted. Can’t happen here? Hmmm. Current court cases show the lengths to which the state squelched opposing views on a number of policies they advocated. The force of the state is alleged to have been used in the case of social media companies and actual force in the case of American citizens. Armed law enforcement, far beyond the perceived threat, was used to apply “legal” actions in several cases.
In what appears to be a concerted effort to “poke the bear into a response”, the state continues to provoke those who would take umbrage with their policies. Questions remain as to what, if any, government actors were involved in the actions of January 6th. Undercover government agents have been regularly used to ferret out subversives but, in some cases, have crossed the line into entrapment. With the current suspicions held my so many, why would the state continue to utilize this nefarious means to identify threats? Litigation of political opponents has an ugly scent. More cases are being brought requiring those targeted to spend large amounts of money to defend themselves. The aggressors win even if they don’t prevail in court. Add the media’s piling on when it is someone with whom they disagree.
Politicians on both sides fail to see the powder keg on which they sit. They continue to castigate their opponents in evil terms and use legal terms like treason and insurrection when identifying them. Racist and white supremacist do not have jail or death sentences attached to them, but these do. How does that lend itself to reasoned discourse on an issue like gun control or abortion? Neither side wants to put down their rhetorical gun. Rather, they escalate it to a point where they become entrenched in their own argument and can’t dare to see a glimmer of the alternative. Worse, they apply a slur to those who simply have a different opinion. The old, “we agree to disagree” no longer holds water with these
“leaders” who now see their ability to remain in power tied to their raising enough cane to get clicks and interviews on a compliant media. Anger, like sex, sells in politics. As result, we can expect to be yelled at instead of talked to for the foreseeable future. I’d like to be persuaded that’s not true.
Current Day Publius 