Excellent points, but he omits the fact that there are people who manipulate
those voters with conservative values so that they see everyone who
disagrees with them as the enemy. The people who do the manipulating, are
the wealthy elites who may or may not share those conservative values, but
who use them so that people's votes will benefit them financially.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of peter altschul
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2018 12:03 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Creating a Common-Good Politics
Here's How We Can Create a Common-Good Politics
Simon Greer Independent Media Institute November 7, 2018, 7:22 AM GMT
Way back in 2004, I was in Ohio in the run-up to that year's presidential
election. I had a chance to talk to a woman who was one of the undecided
"values voters" who would become folklore among political strategists and
pundits in the ensuing years.
"I guess I probably like Kerry's policies more than Bush's,"
she said, "but at the end of the day, when Bush is unsure what to do, I
trust that he will pray to Jesus to find his way. And then America will be
more likely to find favor in the Lord."
I shook my head, as I imagine many others do when they encounter political
mindsets like that, and walked away. All these years later, though, I have
been humbled by a decade and a half of history, and am far more curious
today about what that woman, and the many Americans like her, meant by that,
and how we can bridge the divide between us-in elections and after the votes
are counted.
One way that progressives can do this is to find a new way forward for our
own movement, one that opens space for a wider range of values and
identities. After an important and polarizing national election, like this
one, it is not an easy time but it is a crucial time to take a step back and
ask ourselves one very challenging question: What role have we played in
creating these deep divisions? Only then, can we examine what we can do to
help heal them.
I'm not talking about "centrist" candidates, watered-down compromise
positions, or some mythical moderate "middle." I'm talking about
understanding the two typologies that are essentially waging a war over the
soul of America.
I believe there's a road to be found toward common-good politics, where
the values that undergird those two typologies can become compatible, and
even complementary. Can we move away from caricature, away from our fear of
the other, and actually seek to be enriched by taking seriously the building
blocks of each other's worldviews? Can we honor the values that each "camp"
holds dear?
I say we can. The values of others are not a threat simply because
they're different from ours, and it is fundamentally counterproductive to
imagine that they can be "defeated." You can't defeat the other side's
values. In trying to do so, you only strengthen their devotion to them, and
vice versa. Instead, if we show others that what matters to them matters to
us, that creates the space needed to forge new solutions.
We live in a moment when a narrative has been built in which we appear to
be fundamentally at odds. In this narrative, the much-talked-about liberal
elite is described as:
Global: They enjoy exotic vacations and are more familiar with plane
travel than bus travel. They are legitimately global citizens, they prize
human rights and they believe in larger interests than the national
interest.
Universal: They are committed to multiculturalism. They have a belief that
all ethical, spiritual and civic traditions have "shared values" that
everyone can agree to. They are conceptually committed to a wide circle of
concern that ostensibly includes equal treatment for all, regardless of
background. They wear a fairness badge proudly.
Secular: They believe in reason. Science and rationalism carry the day.
They appreciate relativist values that are context-dependent. They are
spiritual, but not religious; ethical, not moral.
Conservatives, on the other hand, have come to be defined by localism,
particularism and religion:
Local: Their specific place matters: the pond where they fish, the town
where they grew up, the church where they worship. They value the way life
was in these places in the old days.
Particular: They are loyal to their tradition, obligated to their community,
rigorous in their faith, and committed to their team.
They don't believe all faiths, communities, and traditions are the same, and
they don't expect everyone to be as interested in theirs as they are.
Religious: They believe in God. They are in a meaningful relationship with
a higher power. Their theology animates their decisions. They work hard
every day to live by a moral compass.
They might even trust in the candidate who will pray to Jesus to find his or
her way.
Through my experience, I have become all too familiar with how little
tolerance there often is for the liberal side of this typology among
conservatives, for sure. And, while the caricature might be unfair, what
has been so surprising to me is how intolerant liberals have become of the
conservative typology and the lived experiences of those who subscribe to
it. For example, it wouldn't be out of the ordinary to hear one of my
progressive friends saying, in reference to outsourced manufacturing jobs in
the heartland:
"Those towns have been left behind, and there is nothing we can do about it.
Technology, globalization and now automation are the new reality. If people
can do well in school, relocate and retrain, there's lots of opportunity out
there."
Or on climate change:
"Science tells us that carbon emissions are causing global warming. We know
it is man-made, and if those backward-looking evangelicals would stop hiding
behind their irrational claims about God and the end of days, we could deal
with this rationally."
Or on religion:
"America was formed from many faiths and ethnic traditions, and we must give
them all space in today's conversations. In the end, all the great
traditions say the same thing about how we treat each other and what is
fair."
Democrats elected in Washington are typically perceived by conservative
voters through this framework: global versus local, universal versus
particular, and secular versus religious. This contributes to the
splintering of the coalition progressives need to build in order to enact
the policies they've been pushing for.
Without a broad majority, there is no action on climate change, gun
violence, income inequality, or any of the dire issues that we face. We can
build that coalition-if we take seriously the pillars of a worldview that
has been ignored for too long: the local, the particular, the religious.
The reality is, forging a new common-good politics requires finding a way
that you can love your local place, be particular about your own tradition
and believe in God, and still be at home with our shared values. Rather
than looking across the ocean, the conservative voter is likely to be
concerned about the pond where his dad taught him to fish; rather than
believing that she will be the beneficiary of international cooperation,
this voter is more likely to be concerned about how her own town thrives
again; rather than seeking ecumenical interfaith experiences, these voters
remain interested primarily in their own religious background and the moral
compass it gives them.
Many of the reforms and causes progressives have championed are compatible
with conservative Americans' devotion to the specificity of place, a
patriotic dedication to the unique American experiment, the particularity of
community, and personal faith traditions.
If we can't get inside this worldview and weave it together with our own,
many Americans will have little reason to trust the important social
programs and reforms that the progressive movement is committed to. The
longer we dwell on these questions, the more obvious it becomes how vital it
is to develop a political typology where the religious and the secular, the
global and the local, the particular and the universal can be woven together
authentically.
Closer to home, I've seen an encouraging example of how this can work: My
wife is as progressive as they come, supportive of all the issues that
define modern-day liberals, progressives, and Democrats-and she is also
Jewish, born and raised in Baltimore.
She loves her hometown, and is committed to seeing it succeed.
It's equally important to her that our children be raised not only with
generic universalist values, but within the Jewish tradition-the Hebrew
Bible, the Exodus story, the history that belongs very particularly to us.
She reconciles the two typologies.
Working-class Americans of all races wake up every day caring about God,
family and country (and sports), and if we can't get inside that worldview,
and see the wisdom in it, we will always sound like our ideas are outside of
the realm of common sense for too many people.
Millions of people just went to the polls. Many of them felt that there
was no room for them in the progressive movement.
It's our job to prove them wrong.
