I normally steer clear of politics on my blog, but I really do think I should address the polarization of politics. So no, I’m not going to tell you who I voted for and that if you didn’t also vote for them that you’re wrong; I want to talk about the disagreement so many of us have over how things should be run, over why they should be run that way, and over who should do the running.
I should let you know that this blog is spurred by a sense of frustrated disappointment with both politicians and voters. While researching candidates for offices to see who I thought I should vote for, I discovered so many blanket statements about several key issues. I know that’s how you often have to do politics; people like to hear certain words, and if you don’t say them then you won’t get their votes. But there’s so much more complexity to the issues! There’s so much more to talk about! There are things we should be talking about that are very uncomfortable, but we won’t because they’re very uncomfortable and we can’t let the other side(s) be correct or make a good point, not even a little bit.
I’ve discovered that part of the problem is that a lot of people don’t want to think. Sometimes I understand. There’s enough going on each day for us to think about, why add more if you don’t have to? It’s hard work to have to be aware of certain information and to have to and make complex decisions based on it, so to have things reduced to blanket statements and sound-bytes is much simpler. If you can have an “us versus them” mentality, then that makes everything much more convenient. If the other side is always wrong, then your side can always be right. If there’s no nuance, trickiness, or difficult implication in the issues, then you don’t have to talk about anything uncomfortable or realize that you might have at least one thing wrong with your position. Let someone else reduce it down to a nice little soup for you, and it’s all so much more digestible. But there’s so much more beautiful, uncomfortable complexity to the issues than the reduction. While it is much simpler to have it all reduced to black and white, not all of it can or should be categorized so tidily.
When you get right down to it, we all really want the same thing. We want things to go well for us, our neighbors, and our country, and we want to be left alone to enjoy it. We all want people to have good houses, plenty of food and water, comfortable clothes, access to quality and affordable healthcare, and fulfilling jobs that cover the cost of living. We all also have ideas about how those things can be brought about for everyone without cheating someone else out of it. This is where we often disagree. How much is too much government involvement, and how much is not enough? How much of my own morality is acceptable as law, and how much of it is encroaching on the free religious rights – or even human rights – of others? How much can be blanketed with no exception, and how much should be taken care of on a case-by-case basis? Can more than one side have different pieces of a solution for each issue? Can we stop looking at each other like rivals for a moment and open up a conversation? Can we listen to each other, even if we disagree, and find some common ground?
We do not have to be polarized with our politics. We’re supposed to be working together as friends, neighbors, and compatriots to help each other, not vying as rivals trying to win control.
Related:
Let’s (Not) Get Political
Listen to People
Listening Ears
Civil Discourse
Disagree While Still Getting Along
Disagreement and Love
Tolerance and Disagreement
Open Discussion
Legislating Righteousness
Political Change versus Spiritual Change