I try to keep the content of this blog positive. There is so much goodness and beauty in our world, and any sane person would want to keep his eyes on that. Sometimes, however, simple human responsibility impels you to face up to some of the ugliness. Contemporary America is facing a vast increase in ugliness and craziness. Extreme positions are becoming mainstream conversation, and real people are being targeted as threats to decency, America and God. I’m convinced these voices have to be countered. Someone has to stand up for Reason.
But there is the challenge facing anyone, anywhere on the political spectrum, who is concerned about the growth of hate and extremism in America - how do you talk about it without sounding hate-filled and extremist yourself? Is it possible to discuss such immoderation in a moderate way? Is it even responsible? Do we risk soft-pedaling the danger when we try to stay cool and detached while reporting on certain figures and groups who are clearly miles from any kind of mainstream?
On the other hand, don't we give them cover by allowing our own speech to drift into their own territory? It's very natural to slip into the language of "threat" and "danger." That's clearly what these people are. They don't believe in democracy (in any meaningful sense of the term); it's too messy and it's too easy for them to lose. They certainly don't believe in pluralism or tolerance. However, if I point out such facts then they (or their sympathizers) can easily accuse me of the same sins and call me "hypocrite." Even worse, they may actually make me a hypocrite! When arguing against voices of irrationality and intolerance it is so easy to become filled with rage, and to actually become your opponent! Then your opponent has won. As the old saying goes, "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience."
Still, as tempting as it is (and it is very tempting!) one can't withdraw into the peace and comfort of an ivory tower and attempt to remain above it all. There are Bad People out there - a few, anyway. And there are many, many stupid, fear-filled people looking for salvation and willing to follow the Bad People if they promise it (in case this state of affairs sounds familiar, it existed in Weimar Germany in the early 1930s). It is neither partisan nor hysterical to tell the truth. All voices are not the same, and the craziest people out there pose the greatest danger our country has seen since the 1850s.
And we all know how that turned out.
I am a Catholic, a Leftist and a (very amateur) Classicist. I found my way to “Dancing with the Universe” via your sound criticism of "The Swerve" on Amazon. I also like the "fine line" you define in "Talking About Extremism." That said, I confess to indulging the extremes at times - giving way to the enveloping rage. Do you know the line by Augustine? “Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.” I sometimes feel I should “rein it in.” But I’m also wary of the nearly undetectable danger of quietism. Recently, I discovered that Max Planck's son participated in a plot to kill Hitler, and wonder how far The National Lunacy will go in America. What does strategized “calmness” mean in these extraordinary times. Happily, there are signs of disaffection with The Tea Party. Still, the nation’s Know Nothing instinct runs much deeper than such vapid outcroppings. More on Planck at http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2011/11/daily-dose-october-29-2011.html
ReplyDelete