I’m extremely wary of those who spend too much time focusing on tactics, tone, and the alleged incivility of our political life. If anything, there is far too much consensus on important issues, particularly where elite and popular opinion diverge, i.e., immigration, gay marriage. From Hilary Clinton to John McCain, our politicians spend far too much time discussing their opponents’ “mean” rhetoric and “dirty tricks.” Similarly, while I think Andrew Sullivan’s criticism of Bob Herbert and the politics of polarization in The French Third Republic are interesting, I also think his own decision to prioritize gay marriage above every other issue, including national security, takes away his own credibility to decry our political culture.
Polarization is not just a question of tone; it is also a question of policy. Radical liberalism, by putting every inherited folkway and institution in its rationalist crucible, does more to raise the stakes than any of the rear guard actions waged by conservatives in defense of the way things have always been done.
Subscribe To This Feed
I consider myself a moderately conservative sort, but where are lines drawn between what is perceived as liberal or conservative? Many times, distinguishing agendas between parties is nearly impossible. However, there are plenty of examples where the gap is far and wide. For instance, I lean toward conservationism. I have been separating glass, plastic and metal from the rest of my garbage for years. I drive a fuel efficient vehicle. I believe global warming is man’s fault to a certain degree. Not all, of course, but at least some of it. To plenty of conservative Republicans, I would be labeled a liberal for harboring such dreaded thoughts. Why? All the fossil fuels we’ve burned and all the chemicals we’ve spilled on the ground and in our waters have nothing to do with it? If not for giant corporations lobbying Washington (and other governments) for breaks, would global warming be a political issue at all?
As far as I’m concerned, saving the planet should not be a political issue, yet both parties, particularly in the US, have turned it into one and they both use it to their strategic advantage. Climatologists can be Republicans, too. Why do people categorize most causes as political and attempt to pit common people against each other? Why shouldn’t the government educate us on why its not safe to eat an asbestos sandwich slathered with a lead based paint? They should and they do.
Sometimes, common sense takes the back seat and power prevails over politics, many times to the exclusion of what’s best for us all.