Just as dolphins swim together in pods to protect each other from predators, people tend to gravitate toward those who share their worldviews in order to jointly defend against opposing perspectives. My center-left viewpoint is well-represented within my pod and I admit to thoroughly enjoying the time I spend in my personal echo chamber. However, I do have numerous good friends who swim in other political pods.
I find my friends on the far-left to be mostly well-intentioned if not particularly practical. I try to remind myself that similar groups of people throughout history have championed worthy causes that shook the political norms of their day – causes such as women’s suffrage, civil rights, gay marriage, food safety laws, Medicare, and Social Security. Still, I visibly wince at some of the “Big Block of Cheese” ideas that are advocated by today’s progressives. (If you’re not a fan of The West Wing, you’ll just have to look it up.)
With many of my friends to my right, I unreservedly enjoy debating political issues and I can respect their sincere, informed positions even when we strongly disagree. I have even been known to change my mind when confronted with sound arguments. Not often, though.
With other friends further to the right, I desperately avoid political discussions altogether in attempts preserve the relationships. Sometimes I think that the intrinsic problem is my inability to fully understand their perspectives. Sometimes I think that the intrinsic problem is that they are blithering idiots. It’s a work-in-progress.
I have, however, completely disconnected from almost everyone in the far-right pod. (I try hard to maintain family exemptions, but that waiver is under constant review.) Despite some redeeming qualities that initially welcomed these people into my pod-adjacent world, I find their political viewpoints reprehensible to the point of moral outrage. I brand this group as predators who pose a clear danger to my pod.
The predator pod includes, but is definitely not limited to:
- Those who participated in or approved of an open insurrection against the United States. I reject the premise that there are anarchists on both political extremes as a false equivalency. The far-right mob that stormed the Capitol self-identified as Trump supporters; the destructive rioters who took advantage of peaceful BLM protests weren’t wearing Biden hats. Both groups were criminals; only one was politically aligned.
- The 45 GOP United States Senators who just voted against holding an impeachment trial for a President who quite obviously incited an insurrection on national television. They didn’t vote to clear him of the charge; they voted that the charge wasn’t worth considering.
- A GOP United States Congresswoman who claims that the Parkland school shooting was a hoax designed to advance gun control laws.
- The so-called “Christian Right” who makes a mockery of religion. When confronted with their hypocrisy, I find it difficult to suppress a verbal cascade of obscenities. While that would be an admittedly non-optimal strategy for winning a spiritual argument, the fact is that I find nothing at all spiritual about those who would hijack Christianity for amoral political purposes.
So. Is there a point to this diatribe?
I try to make an honest, concerted effort to understand opposing political positions. Nevertheless, I can quite happily write off an apparently large portion of the populace. I have zero desire to engage with any of the political predators on the far-right. Since I suspect others’ tolerance levels may be even more restrictive than my own, I am increasingly skeptical of our ability to find any common ground upon which to construct some semblance of national unity. My post-election affair with optimism didn’t last long.
Do I have a suggestion for addressing our political polarization? Nah. I have no clue. I just thought I’d share the little black cloud that is lingering above my pod today.
You’re welcome.
And thanks for all the fish.