by Ruth A. Sheets
On Thursday, March 29th’s NPR program “Here and Now,” a discussion was held regarding morality and what the two political parties/political positions hold as “sacred.” The guest said that one of our greatest problems currently is that “liberals” and “conservatives” don’t interact with each other. They don’t exchange ideas on a personal level. Members of Congress work in Washington for only a short period each week, then rush home to their districts. They don’t have to really work with anyone on the other side of the aisle.
When people can’t be together on a personal level, they can’t begin to understand the position of the others. Without such understanding, each side can become entrenched in their own beliefs and attitudes.
The guest explained that each side antagonizes the other by stepping on, defacing, or denigrating the things the other holds as sacred. If people can only understand what the other holds as sacred, the anger and fear may dissipate, at least somewhat.
The Republicans/Conservatives hold such icons as the flag, the Bible, and the cross/crucifix as their most revered objects/concepts. The Democrats/Liberals tend to hold the concepts of fairness and equal opportunity for all as inviolable.
When a flag is burned or desecrated, the actual desecration seems more important than the reason for it. There is no room for any of their top three symbols to be treated with anything they might see as disrespect, no matter why.
When conservatives propose actions that do not seem to allow for fair treatment of all groups or which do not accommodate equal opportunity, Liberals often see them as being heartless, often to the point of evil.
The thing I noticed is that the conservatives cling to objects which no one is allowed do disrespect, but people in general are less important. Liberals seem to lean more toward people and value symbols and objects less. It seems to me that there is a qualitative difference here.
Objects and symbols are easy to deal with. They don’t need anything. They make no real demands, except loyalty. Admittedly, that is a pretty strong master.
People are messy, unpredictable, often needy. The struggle for fairness and equality of opportunity is a lot harder than defending the flag, Bible, or cross, especially when the latter involves only speech in 3-word slogans or even letters (“U-S-A, Drill baby drill.”).
It is easy to think of those who revere symbols as patriotic because those symbols can be easily displayed in nearly any type of setting.
Improvement of conditions for people, fairness, justice for all are very hard to display. These generally require stories which take time to experience, time which our current short attention spans don’t accommodate. But are these less “patriotic?”
It would be helpful if people on the “left” were a bit more sensitive to the “right’s” need that their symbols not be desecrated in art, protest, and other areas of life. However, the sad part is that I don’t feel the “right” will reciprocate, at least not in this period of our history.
I believe it is not that the people on the “left” don’t value the things the “right” holds as sacred. It is that we do not place them above people.
I would never burn an American flag, Bible or cross. But neither would I burn a Koran, star of David, or the flag of any other country or organization. Yet I think my sterling respect for the sacred symbols of others is not going to keep the GOP from destroying my healthcare, my environment, and what little is left of my bank account.
ReplyDelete