The same similarities prevailed between England and her North American colonies in 1776, but they did not prevent the development of a separate nationalism in the latter. It is not language or law alone that is important, but the uses to which either is put. In the United States of the 1850s, Northerners and Southerners spoke the same language, to be sure, but they were increasingly using this language to revile each other. Language became an instrument of division, not unity. [Drawn with the Sword: Reflections on the Civil War (Oxford University Press, 1996).]To me, these sentences indict America in 2012. Like North and South in the 1850s, American conservatives and liberals in the early 21st century speak and write to strip skin from each other. Common ground is elusive, if it is sought, which often it is not. Conversation too often is quest to dominate and destroy.
I don’t think each side is equally to blame in this; but I won’t dwell on that. Your might appoint blame in an opposite way from me. I will say that blame is shared.
And rather than dwell on an endless cycle of accusation and counter-accusation, I propose that we stop and ask: is this what we want?
1. The direction of America.
When did America become so Darwinian? When did we cease to yield to each other for the common good? When did we cease to be a people who disagreed, and come to be enemies? When did each victory and defeat become a booyah moment for one side and, for the other, an occasion for fresh accusations of cheating and fraud?
I wonder if some people will not recognize America in this description. I wonder if some people will say, "But of course we flail [the other side]! They’re political stenches!"
And so North and South felt about each other before the shooting started that ended with 600,000 deaths.
I’m not predicting a new Civil War. Geographically, conservatives and liberals are too enmeshed to plausibly divide. But American conservatives and liberals might be united in one thing and one thing only: together, we might dive into the pit of mutually-assured destruction.
It might not be the sudden self-destruction of a nuclear blast. But it might be. One side or the other might commit some act such as willful refusal to honor national debt already incurred. (By, for example, refusing to raise the debt ceiling.) And, if the timing is right, that could create an economic crisis that could greatly degrade America's economic power.
But if the mutually-assured destruction does not come suddenly like a nuclear blast, it could come slowly, like the nuclear-winter aftermath of such an blast. Just like plants will cease to receive light and make oxygen in a nuclear winter, political stalemate could starve politics of the cooperation that it needs to move forward in any direction.
2. The danger of paralysis.
When I was a young prosecutor, I learned to make decisions quickly. I realized that things happen in trial that you couldn’t predict or prepare for. And as a trial lawyer, I couldn’t walk out the back door of the courtroom and take the elevator to the cafeteria to sip coffee and think of the next step. I had to make an instant decision. I have often been in that position.
And sometimes I made the right decision. Sometimes I made the wrong decision. Sometimes my instant solution was good, sometimes it was bad. But in 50 out of 50 cases, the decision that I made was better than standing in the courtroom and doing nothing.
Look at Europe. When the recent economic crisis hit, Europe united in a solution. That solution was austerity. Now, a few years later, all of the richest countries of Europe except Germany have realized that austerity has made things worse. They are calling for a united pro-growth program, maybe similar to America’s stimulus, which has saved America from the steep downturn that Europe has suffered. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/world/world-leaders-at-us-meeting-urge-growth-not-austerity.html?hp
But the point isn’t to gloat that America’s response was better than Europe’s. The point is that Europe made a choice; now that it has realized that it was the wrong choice, Europe is seriously considering reversing course.
America has to keep that option. We have a political system where one side prevails or the other one does. The prevailing party moves forward with its solutions. If those sulutions turn out to be wrong, then the other side gets its chance at the next go-round. If we can’t follow this time-tested, time-honored democratic model, then we become like homeowners who let their house burn rather that quench the fire by the other homeowners’ plan.
But increasingly, we see political immobility. Increasingly we see a system of politics where one party sabotages the other rather than allow the other party to have success or move forward. And, given our interdependence, that’s like one faction in a submerged submarine sabotaging the engines. Sabotage is suicide.
If politics keeps going where it has been going, we will become a nation of political suicide bombers. In every way.
3. Solutions.
We tend to think our positions are right. But before we speak out, we might ask: is this helpful? Does this build up America? Not every thought needs to be expressed.
We tend to feel dismayed or angry or frustrated with the other side. When we do, we might ask: do I hate [name of other political party] more than I love America? We can’t love America and hate a huge part of it. If we love only part of it, let’s be honest with ourselves. Let’s say, "God bless [name of our own political party]", because "God bless America" is ashes in our mouth.
Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Tip O’Neill were famous adversaries, but they were also good and honorable friends. Their mutual opposition and mutual respect are a model for Republicans and Democrats today. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/17/AR2011011703299.html
Nor is the nastiness of politics today good or useful. When I was a new prosecutor, I was told: hit hard blows, but fair ones. Politics should be like that.
Common ground exists among us. Sometimes it’s common religion – in the broad sense. Christians share faith in Jesus Christ. Christians and Jews share faith in the God of Abraham and in much common scripture. Muslims share a faith in the God of Abraham.
Sometimes it’s as simple as a willed goodwill. Sometimes it’s just that we’re all Americans. Common ground should be cultivated.
The beneficiaries of hatred and stalemate in American politics won’t be one party or the other. Certainly, it won’t be the American people. It will be China. It will be Russia. It will be radical Islam. It won’t be us.
Onward.
No comments:
Post a Comment