Skip to main content

Real Clear Motivated Reasoning (The Decline Of The Right, Continued)

Real Clear Politics is a great site, especially during election season. Data, commentary, major speeches, and all the rest make it highly useful and enjoyable for political junkies. That's still an accurate descriptor of me.

And I don't know who finds the opinion and analysis pieces, but I notice those that lean Right have noticeably declined in quality, with respect to avoiding ad hominems. The headlines are ad hominems, as are the pieces themselves. There seem to be alternate realities, and there doesn't appear to be any willingness to seek any neutral ground of fact to re-establish some basis for constructive conversation.

The Right in general is given over to conspiracies and a bunker mentality. Most people I know and see who are "conservative" (whatever that means) ignore the mainstream media altogether, in favor of ideological sources. Here's the thing, though: You can't persuade someone without a common language, and common facts. The political Right is of no use if it completely abandons a shared vision, shared language, and shared facts. Politics itself is impossible without this.

This new "anti-politics" of "owning the libs" seems to appeal to many people. It gets dangerous and ultimately self-defeating when one's tribe no longer holds the levers of power, and the level of contempt one shows has inspired a furious backlash.

Most importantly, people forget more fundamentally that we have to live together.

Politics has never been this consequential to people, and yet more frivolous, as it is today. That makes me sad. I'm not sure what to do about it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar