Surely, it's too easy to say that our public discourse is
simply a war between "the left" and "the right." It's not
that simple. Myriad philosophical and practical commitments come into play in
concrete situations. And how many individuals fit into the categories of
"liberal" or "conservative," with no remainder?
And yet. This framework powerfully shapes conversation in
the U.S. (and elsewhere?). It's reinforced, moreover, by a two-party political system,
in which candidates bow down at the altar of party platform, and voters forget
there are other ways to think. In the world I inhabit of Christian (and
particularly Catholic) theology, a standoff between "left" and
"right" certainly does seem to describe much of what we say, and how
we say it.
So, assuming for a moment that an ongoing battle between
liberals and conservatives does in some way structure the way we think and
interact, it's worth it for us to ask: how could we do this better? Both in
moving toward greater understanding and in moving toward concrete action, what
very small steps might allow us to begin to envision working together?
Charles Camosy, fellow theologian, has recently offered his
own eminently sensible list of suggestions for avoiding polarization and moving
forward in fruitful ways. Here, I'd like to fine-tune a little further, with
two very concrete suggestions that assume asymetry in the way liberals and
conservatives see each other. My guess is that they may apply not only in my
little theological world, but also more broadly. For some people, they will
seem like too much to ask. For others, they will seem like much too little. But
for what it's worth to those in the middle, here they are.
Conservatives should not assume that liberals are libertine
pleasure-seekers. Now, let the record show: it turns out there are, in fact,
some liberals who are libertine pleasure-seekers. (Or, at least, they give
every evidence that this is the case.) This, however, is a caricature of
liberal commitments, and it does not describe at all the lives of many, many
convinced liberals (not to mention the fact that it does pretty neatly describe
some conservatives). Think of the work of so many who give their lives in
dangerous and uncomfortable places, providing food and medicine and life-giving
education, putting themselves at risk for the good of others, precisely because
of their liberal commitments. If any individual conservative thinker would
begin by assuming that there are liberals living lives of self-discipline and
self-sacrifice that would put her to shame, she would stand the best chance of
being right.
Liberals should not assume that conservatives are stupid
(or, at best, ignorant). Again, friends, we must admit: there are conservatives
for whom intellect is not their greatest gift. There are, furthermore,
conservatives who hold to their positions simply because it's never occurred to
them to think otherwise. And, both of these are true of some liberals, as well.
The fact is, on the other hand, that there are staunch conservatives who are
brilliant, who study and teach at the most outstanding universities in the world,
and whose conservative positions are based precisely on a lifetime of careful,
consistent thinking. If any individual progressive thinker would begin by
assuming that there are conservatives vastly more intelligent and better
educated than herself, she would stand the best chance of being right.
Again, I suspect that many people will see these as
hopelessly minimal suggestions. Others may find them too much to take on. (How,
after all, can you tell yourself not to believe something that simply is true?)
Still others—yes, I
hear those whispers through the Internet—will only want
to note that I haven't gotten it quite right. (Liberals aren't libertine;
they're just hopelessly naive. Conservatives aren't dumb; they're just mean.)
In any case, though, it seems to me worth it to clear away some brush here--with
the hope of burning it. There are serious issues and questions to be addressed.
Let's get on to those, rather than wasting our time with these.
