Sometimes an image stays with a person. I will probably never forget the glee with which Pat Buchanan protested not being invited to join the "vast right wing conspiracy' against President Clinton when his wife used that phrase. Of late I have been wondering why, as an admitted supporter of lesbian / gay equality, I have not been invited to join the left-wing conspiracy?
I mention this because I think there is a tendency among partisans to see the 'other side' or 'worthy opponents' as a monolith. Sometimes we even see ourselves that way.
I have been told, by a self-identified conservative that,”Conservatives believe..." There is a litmus test here: I must believe this, or I am not a member of his group.
I read frequently, that "Conservatives (or Liberals) believe..." This is often a stereotype. It of course works both ways, I have frequently found myself on Dr. Virtue's board (when I was welcome there) posting to explain that lots of liberals do not believe something that has been assigned by others to the stereotype.
So what is to be said about this? I think we need to stop labeling each other and stop assigning either litmus tests or stereotypes. Maybe we can find some things we agree on if we drop the assumptions. I guess that is why I keep trying and keep posting on very conservative web sites. I recently was told by a priest who is deeply suspicious of the left's enthusiasm for gay bishops that he avoided the "spiritual rot" on Stand Firm. I can relate, yet I post there, hoping to give some a sense that some of us understand they actually have something to say. Sometimes I even agree.
Underlying all of the heat and light I read and hear is a false assumption. That assumption is that we all must agree. Beyond what the Lambeth Quadrilateral and the Nicene Creed tell us, we do not have to agree. Within those two important statements of faith, we can disagree about exactly what is meant. Disagreeing may be the only way we can grow.
Dr. Goddard who was told by the authorities of his day that rockets would not work in space because there is nothing there for them to push against. Consider where we would be if he had agreed. History is littered with received wisdom with which someone disagreed. After all, everyone knew that women could not be tough enough to fly airplanes, swim the English Channel, or be priests. For that matter, they clearly cannot be prime ministers or presidents -- I guess Mrs. Thatcher and Sen. Clinton did not get the memo.
I routinely refer to the 'sin of ideology.' I think it is evil, per se, to adopt a view because it fits liberal, conservative, socialist etc values. Examine an idea on its own merit!
Of course this does not fit the fund raising model. To get the average person to reach for their Pay Pal account, one needs a demon. It is not enough for an opponent to be wrong, they have to be plotting to corrupt America's youth. (On the record, that is a job already done. Corrupt taste is the only explanation for listening to Britney Spears :gak: singing.) Of course the Left contributor has to be told we are facing 'women seeking abortions in back alleys' or the end of free speech.
Maybe this is all unavoidable, I don't know. What I do know is I think the Good News and living in the Kingdom is insisting that we stop the labels, stop the litmus tests and treat each other as humans. Which I suppose means understanding that in our age, ideology is the most pernicious sin.
FWIW
Profile Information
- JimB
- I am an Anglo-catholic Episcoplain layman, a lay contemplative, a musician, and a completely doting grandfather. New slogan for the election cycle: Vote for Cthulhu -- don't settle for the lesser evil!
8 comments:
Wise words. I am glad I visited.
Or is this all an elaborate ruse....
Seriously, I start getting suspicious when I start seeing conspiracy theories, not so much that I think there is a counter-conspiracy, but, rather, that the writer hasn't given sufficient thought to the problem. Raising a conspiracy makes me less wiling to believe, not more.
Peace,
Phil
Thank you for your thoughtful post. It's important to continue to state that , yes, we do not all need to agree. When our church went through a difficult period several years back, this was an important realization that many people arrived at that allowed them to stay in the church in the parish and to continue to pray together and continue to disagree. Thus our regard for one another as human beings remains, and we are all the richer. This is one of the beauties of our Theology.
D P, thanks!
Phil,
That is what THEY want you to think! :-)
My first rule is that if the Wall Street Journal has missed it, there is reason for doubt -- lots of it.
Dreaning,
Thanks! It is a good rule that we can disagree on the rules. But don't tell the Global South or the righteous North! ;-)
FWIW
jimB
Yes, we invent problems or hype up the opposing point of view to loosen the paypal accounts. More often rather then invent problems the like the music man we merely make the issue more immediate and vulgar. But there is security in taking the token view of either liberal or democrat or whatever. Not only to have a clique to belong to, you have an a purpose. The more you let the a self applied label like conservative fill in the blanks on what americans fight over in election years, the more freedom one has from thought. Freedom.
Good to hear that the accident was not worse - prayers.
Jim,
I don't know about conspiracies. I was intrigued by your point about commenting on all sorts and conditions of blogs. I tend to agree. although I read SF daily - sometimes it does have the best news - I rarely read the comments anymore and comment even less. But I also see some of my liberal confreres doing the same thing on their blogs, i.e., being very inhospitable toward those with whom they disagree. But I agree with your general point in any case.
Cheers,
RFSJ
Post a Comment