Are there certain clarifying moments in political discourse? Are there moments that demonstrate just where various parties stand? Never has the rift been so obvious. A few short weeks ago, the left declared the world in imminent peril. Why? President Trump pulled out of the altogether meaningless Paris climate accord, a worldwide agreement requesting nonbinding commitments from signatories about future carbon emissions cuts. Reaction to the announcement was swift and not so unexpected. The hysteria was palpable. Suddenly, repudiated weather scientist Al Gore found himself in prime television slots jabbering about the end of the world. Nancy Pelosi gabbled about how Trump was "dishonoring" God. Yes, this from the DC empress of “abortion on demand.” MSM ran headlines showing the world in flames. London’s Mayor released a statement bemoaning Trump's decision. French president Macron appeared dumbfounded and bent out of shape by the pullout, meanwhile, persons of my political persuasion simply countered with, “c’est la vie” (That’s life!). Long and short of it; the agreement did virtually nothing anyway.
In early June a three man team of Islamic terrorists drove a van into a crowd on a London bridge, and then jumped out of the vehicle and began stabbing people in surrounding establishments. As expected, ISIS claimed responsibility. The right immediately labeled the attacks yet another example of Islamic extremism gaining the momentum, linking them with the Manchester concert attack. President Trump immediately denounced the terror attacks and called for an end to PC policies, as well as campaigning for his travel ban. Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic complained about leftist multiculturalism creating room for Islamic terror growth.
Meanwhile, the left portrayed ignorance or indifference. From what I am able to confirm, following independent research one CNN “progressive” political commentator warbled about the glories of PC. A columnist for the NYT compared being killed in a terrorist attack to being "killed by a drunk driver." Democrats complained about President Trump's attacks on Khan (London Mayor), who was busy urging Londoners to stay calm after panicking about global warming just days prior.
Can anyone explain the apparent fissure between left and right? The left believes that human beings are inherently good, and that only environment defines whether they will act in evil fashion. This could very well be why Bernie Sanders has in the recent past, connected global warming to the spike in terrorism; it could very well be why the Obama administration routinely suggested that poverty caused terrorism. Are we to believe that external circumstances dictate the morality of individual actors? Food for thought: Is this why the left argues we shouldn't hold people responsible for their actions as a rule; instead, we should reshape society. The right believes (as do I) that human beings are capable of evil on their own. That's why they see the rise of Islamic extremism more of a problem than global warming. Do good people kill each other because of global warming? They may very well, if they begin to believe macabre ideologies, or support those who do.
I ask the reader, if the rift of understanding between left and right will ever be spanned? Maybe, maybe not! It goes back to distinguishing physiognomies of human kind and our perception of that nature. Is not the tension necessitating excessive stress these days somewhat evident? To fault any person but individuals with the power of speech and upright stance in Western cultures for their own downward spiral into malevolence or sin is both analytical and reasonable. On a lighter side, I again ask; What explains the chasm between right and left? Could one conclude the “right got the righteousness and left got the leftovers?”
In early June a three man team of Islamic terrorists drove a van into a crowd on a London bridge, and then jumped out of the vehicle and began stabbing people in surrounding establishments. As expected, ISIS claimed responsibility. The right immediately labeled the attacks yet another example of Islamic extremism gaining the momentum, linking them with the Manchester concert attack. President Trump immediately denounced the terror attacks and called for an end to PC policies, as well as campaigning for his travel ban. Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic complained about leftist multiculturalism creating room for Islamic terror growth.
Meanwhile, the left portrayed ignorance or indifference. From what I am able to confirm, following independent research one CNN “progressive” political commentator warbled about the glories of PC. A columnist for the NYT compared being killed in a terrorist attack to being "killed by a drunk driver." Democrats complained about President Trump's attacks on Khan (London Mayor), who was busy urging Londoners to stay calm after panicking about global warming just days prior.
Can anyone explain the apparent fissure between left and right? The left believes that human beings are inherently good, and that only environment defines whether they will act in evil fashion. This could very well be why Bernie Sanders has in the recent past, connected global warming to the spike in terrorism; it could very well be why the Obama administration routinely suggested that poverty caused terrorism. Are we to believe that external circumstances dictate the morality of individual actors? Food for thought: Is this why the left argues we shouldn't hold people responsible for their actions as a rule; instead, we should reshape society. The right believes (as do I) that human beings are capable of evil on their own. That's why they see the rise of Islamic extremism more of a problem than global warming. Do good people kill each other because of global warming? They may very well, if they begin to believe macabre ideologies, or support those who do.
I ask the reader, if the rift of understanding between left and right will ever be spanned? Maybe, maybe not! It goes back to distinguishing physiognomies of human kind and our perception of that nature. Is not the tension necessitating excessive stress these days somewhat evident? To fault any person but individuals with the power of speech and upright stance in Western cultures for their own downward spiral into malevolence or sin is both analytical and reasonable. On a lighter side, I again ask; What explains the chasm between right and left? Could one conclude the “right got the righteousness and left got the leftovers?”
No comments:
Post a Comment