Some of the debate is good - natured; other comments virtually drip with venom.
If your memory (or knowledge of history) goes back far enough, you might remember President Richard Nixon tried to appeal to the country's silent majority for his votes.
The idea is the silent majority, or the vast middle of our country hold enough folks to tip the national conversation.
The masses are concerned, but quiet. Involved yet unobtrusive.
On the edges of each argument and political party are extremes and virulent opposition to other views. In the middle, we might find space for debate.
"Middlers" are OK with hearing different views and trying to understand other points of view. They may not agree or even come close to changing minds, but when engaged they can find threads leading to a common ground.
Justice and freedom are as important to the middle as the folks on either side. A difference is the refusal to pounce on small gaps and interpret them as an expanding canyon which can't be bridged.
Gun control is an area where I think the folks in the middle could make progress. There could be a way to keep guns out of the hands of those who aren't up for the responsibility and still uphold the principle in the Constitution for the right to bear arms.
After another horrific shooting on a college campus - the hamster wheel of debate started again. The people of the middle might be able to stop the cacophony with debate.
One difficulty is our system is gerryrigged and gerrymandered into poles of political parties (not polls) apart. Districts are drawn in favor of re-electing the majority, so candidates fight over the uber-faithful and one-issue voters.
The moderates, the debaters, the middle don't often make it to the general election.
The extremes are excited. They rise up. They vote.
Maybe its up to us in the middle to be excited, rise up, and vote. The middle has a voice, we need to clear our throats and speak up. Apathy is a recipe for more of the same.
Comments
Post a Comment