#95 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Wednesday July 21)
Good morning,
There is a pernicious game now being fought from the right and the left, whereby the other side is labeled as extreme, unreasonable, and unyielding. As I have written before, when characterizing an opposing view as evil, one no longer has agency or responsibility to confront some of the assertions—the truths—that the other side may legitimately and rationally hold.
Some of my ramblings over the last few months have been around trying to understand why everyone seems to be yelling at each other that the other side is so wrong on so many fronts, unwilling to listen or understand. Perhaps the thing I’m struggling to understand is not why each side is wrong, but why they can’t seem to grasp that the other side may actualy be right.
A key factor in impeding any sort of meaningful discussion is an inability to confront essential truths that undergird other positions. What if both sides possess clear, incontrovertible truths? These truths can compete with each other, yet can be viewed in some sense as complementary of each other and that, were we successful in using these truths to explain each position, also find ways in which these two truths can be worked together toward a more thoughtful, meaningful, and perhaps more sustainable truth that benefits from each strongly held view. In other words, 2+2 may, in fact, equal more than four.
First, let’s dispense with the untruths. I posit that a “truth” is proven untrue if proven untrue by scientific fact, statistics, mathematics, or reason. Conspiracy theories like QAnon, eugenics, the denial of evolutionary theory, etc. all are proven untrue.
Here are three examples where truths exist on both sides of the debate and, if they can be used together potentially can lead to greater understanding
Middle East. As I have alluded to earlier, there are truths on both sides of this debate. Not all displaced Palestinians left what became Israel of their own volition. Not all Arab countries were tolerant of their Jewish populations. Both sides occupy the same land and need to find areas of commonality. The Palestinian people haven’t been embraced by their Arab brothers and Jews historically have been the subject of antisemitism. Perhaps their futures are linked together in acknowledging their histories and looking to the future as partners.
American history. America is one of the few nations founded not on religious identity or common race. It was founded on central concepts of human rights and dignity. Yet, significantly, it has been plagued by a history of racism that conflicts with these underlying values. It is possible to look at American history through both the lens of its aspirational ideals—and the works of peoples of all walks of life and political creed to realize these ideals—as well as through the lens of having to reconcile the shortcomings over its history. Both images of America can be studied in schools together, rather than trying to teach only one or the other.
Climate change and economic reality. Climate change is settled science. Yet the challenges to confront that challenge will be at great economic cost. There are many, not surprisingly and not necessarily of bad intent, who believe that the economic cost in the short term cannot be borne for the longer term gain. But what if there were a way out? Besides the need for carbon tax or carbon transfer regulations, there needs to be a way to reduce the economic impact and accelerate the solution. While I’d be welcome to other possible solutions, I think nuclear power is the only viable option for relatively immediate substitution of a cleaner power source using current technology. The essence of my argument is that we shouldn’t be arguing about climate change but how to address it by making hard choices.
Have a great day,
Glenn
Click here to subscribe to Musings.
From the archives: