Do the Left and Right have shared American Values

For the purposes of this essay I do not mean Republicans and Democrats, I mean left and right. There are moderates and mixed ideologies in both parties, and for this subject I really mean the dedicated on both sides.

In the past we truly had people who differed greatly on policy, but could come together on matters of defense, etc. Today the left and right are truly so far apart I wonder if we can say we share any values. On the macro level I believe we do. I think left and right alike believe their vision of the world and America are the best for both. I don't believe either group wants to see harm come to America. Also for the purposes of this subject, I make no charges or accusations, you can read my writings to see where I stand. You may think I am off base, and that is fine.

When you apply specifics though I think we could not be further apart. To many on the left no war is just. Some will defend the war in Afghanistan, many others do not even defend that. In economics large groups of left will tolerate nothing short of government control of any number of issues such as health care, retirement, executive salaries, minimum wage and a host of others. Those of us on the right see this as a disaster waiting to happen. There seems to be no middle ground. The hard left sees no legitimate need for guns in the citizen ranks. Some on the right would like no restrictions, although I think more often the desire is for less regulation.

The vitriol that this causes is becoming poisonous. Those in the middle think both groups are nuts!!! More and more elections are decided by which group of activists gets the best turnout. I don't consider myself a person in the middle. I do consider myself a person of the right. That being said, in many cases the activists of both groups in many cases are nuts. We have single issue people fighting viciously for their point of view. I am very pro life, but some extreme single issue pro life people push the issue backwards. My views on pro choice activists you can gain from my previous writings, but I believe they are as wrong on policy as they can be, but they are also wrong because they contribute to the cheapening of the language. Avoiding the procedure and talking only about choice, and now referring to it as health care is disingenuous.

Anti war activists are some of the most vitriolic. Anything less than total pacifism will result in you being called evil, murderer, or other such hateful terms. We can disagree about whether we should be in Iraq or not, but we cannot tear our society apart over it. We almost did that over Viet Nam. If this continues we can never go to war again. Our politicians simply will not attempt it even for the most just cause.

I believe the segment of the society that lives on the extremes of both groups is very small, but they seem to get a disproportionate share of attention. They are like spoiled children having a tantrum. (With two children I know from tantrums). I think blogs and talk radio have contributed to this tone. These are two media that I happen to love, but we need to self police ourselves. Getting a vehicle to express your opinions comes with some responsibility. You don't get to spew things you know to be wrong just to make a point. I again am referring morally, not legally. I don't want Internet police telling me what I can't write.

What are the answers? I am not sure there are any in our current climate. We need to talk, and we need to have debates. These are healthy. While doing this we need to listen. We need to acknowledge when the other person has a good point. Most of all we need to admit that a person can be correct, or wrong in your view without being evil. You can also support someone without supporting every thing they do. Today we have to admit Ronald Reagan was wrong to withdraw from Lebanon. This encouraged the Islamofacists (which is not the same as Islam. It distinguishes between the radical killers and the normal practitioners of Islam). That does not take away from the many great things this president did. My view of Bill Clinton has not changed that he was not a great president and even less so as a man. That does not remove that he signed welfare reform, and some other things that were good for the country. We need to have some shared American values, even in the micro. Disagreement does not need to be the end of the story. Hamilton and Jefferson had vehement disagreements. All the while they knew the republic was more important than any one man or faction. Washington cautioned against factions. That is not the same as parties. I believe what we have today is just what Washington cautioned against.