Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Vox Blogoli: Jonathan Rauch
In Vox Blogoli Hugh Hewitt has requested comments regarding Jonathan Rauch writing in the new Atlantic the following:
Let me rephrase the first sentence, leaving out the emotionally charged words. On balance it is probably healthier if a bloc with differing views is included within an affiliated group than be outside. Without the emotion that to me seems perfectly logical, however in practice, I think the bloc always will be outside, initially. Think of one example from the past. Most believed the world to be flat. Any differing view of the world was simply judged "wrong" by the group. Now the round worlders have to "fight" to be heard. "Fight" can be defined by persuading with a preponderance of evidence to literally fighting involving bloodshed. Suppose you are a Freedom Fighter working to secure liberty from a dictator. According to the Bush Doctrine this country would now support such groups seeking freedom and liberty, and the left, I might add, would support this doctrine. Haven't they supported such groups as the PLO. I don't know how to get around the obvious problem of "the ends justify the means" in the fight, outside the group.
“On balance it is probably healthier if religious conservatives are inside the political system than if they operate as insurgents and provocateurs on the outside. Better they should write anti-abortion planks into the Republican platform than bomb abortion clinics. The same is true of the left. The clashes over civil rights and Vietnam turned into street warfare partly because activists were locked out of their own party establishments and had to fight, literally, to be heard. When Michael Moore receives a hero’s welcome at the Democratic National Convention, we moderates grumble; but if the parties engage fierce activists while marginalizing tame centrists, that is probably better for the social peace than the other way around.”
Let me rephrase the first sentence, leaving out the emotionally charged words. On balance it is probably healthier if a bloc with differing views is included within an affiliated group than be outside. Without the emotion that to me seems perfectly logical, however in practice, I think the bloc always will be outside, initially. Think of one example from the past. Most believed the world to be flat. Any differing view of the world was simply judged "wrong" by the group. Now the round worlders have to "fight" to be heard. "Fight" can be defined by persuading with a preponderance of evidence to literally fighting involving bloodshed. Suppose you are a Freedom Fighter working to secure liberty from a dictator. According to the Bush Doctrine this country would now support such groups seeking freedom and liberty, and the left, I might add, would support this doctrine. Haven't they supported such groups as the PLO. I don't know how to get around the obvious problem of "the ends justify the means" in the fight, outside the group.
I agree with the first sentence, don't think that's the way life works, and some will do anything to change the groups beliefs.
Mover Mike
