October 2 , 2022 /

CHOOSING SIDES

When we were kids and played ball on our own, we chose sides.  Two of us were designated as captains and then we each chose one at at time for our side until all were on two opposing sides.  It seemed to us to be a fair way to build a team and compete, all in good fun of course and nothing quite as serious as what we see today as opposing sides in a different arena.

 

I had a civil conversation recently with someone who disagrees with me on numerous issues and we managed to keep the conversation alive through being honest, respectful and transparent. It’s only possible when we believe it’s worth making the effort and taking the time to understand another person’s point of view even if we do not share that view.

 

His background and mine are very different and that accounts for some of our different personal preferences.  However, my hunch is that if we go a little deeper and longer we will discover other places where our lives diverged and went different directions, took different roads because of values, beliefs and practices that include other life and work experiences, including our respective family, school and work experiences.

 

Here is one place where we were in very different situations that inevitably influenced our point of view.  He was a 40-year state employee. I was a 40-year educator with 4 degrees beyond high school.  I do not know if he graduated from high school or college nor do I wish to embarrass him by asking or making comparisons about our educational trajectories.  He may have skills that I do not have and I may have some that he does not.  The point is that because of our different backgrounds we have different views. He is not likely to change my perspective nor am I likely to change his. However, if we keep talking, we might understand and respect the differences better than if we were to descend into labeling, name calling and saying the other side is simply wrong.

 

Some might ask, why bother, it’s a waste of your time.  What I believe is that unless we can find ways to live together in an atmosphere that is more peaceful and kind than violent and hateful  we are likely to destroy the fabric that holds us together as a nation.  Understanding is not synonymous with agreement.  We can listen, we can be honest with one another, we can explore the evidence and the facts although this third requirement is often where there is a departure between what is real and authentic and what is not.  One might go as far as trying to separate fact from fallacy in a reasonable, rational and practical way without letting emotions color the outcome.  I see that as a one of several challenges.

 

When we take sides on an issue whether something historical such as the teaching about slavery or the Holocaust or something more recent like the election of 2020, we need to be able to explain why we come down on a particular side without accusing or judging the other for his/her choice.  We need to be able to present our case with reliable, irrefutable evidence that will stand up in a court of law, if necessary, so that an impartial judgment can decide which position is valid.  What seems to happen is that some people believe what they want to believe regardless of the evidence.  They also seem unwilling or incapable of changing their minds with positions set in concrete. That is called a closed mind set in case you were wondering.

 

Justice is defined as the maintenance or administration of what is just  (having a basis in or conforming to fact or reason) especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments.  If we could agree on using this meaning to decide the outcome, that would be an enormous step forward.  What often happens instead is that one or the other resorts to an accusation or judgment of the opposing side as untruthful as well as corrupt and unfair.  That kind of offense is an intractable defense against which there will be no progress, guaranteed. And this is where we end, agreeing only to disagree.  Is there not a better way forward?  Perhaps the most we can hope for is, at the least, a peaceful disagreement with both sides able to live without fear of retaliation or the other side seeking retribution.  History is filled with lessons of intense disagreements and we know how those ended, or at least some of us believe those recorded events in the past.

 

I will end this blog with a quote from Elie Wiesel that I have referred to on previous occasions. It is from his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize on December 10, 1968 in Oslo, Norway:

 

“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must – at that moment – become the center of the universe.”

 

 

 

 

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *