You have been invited here because someone recommended you to join this page. It’s purpose is to provide a foundation to respond to current political proposals, policies, and laws.
Everyone knows what they believe politically until asked to explain it. You have the length of an elevator ride to persuade the person beside you to listen more. That gives you one-hundred, one-hundred and fifty words. See if you can write out your answer. I used 35 words*.
Everyone should have an elevator pitch, a four-minute position statement, and a twenty minute conversation that explains their fundamental principles about individual rights and the legitimacy of government. Few do. Unfortunately, democratic candidates argue issues, not principles.
I may not be the best person for this task, but I am starting on the long path. I hope others join, perhaps lead. I began working on this issue in 2015, imagining I’d have something completed before the 2016 election. The more I studied, the more I needed to learn. To help write and reorganize the tentatively titled Ground Beneath The Basket Maker’s feet: an extended conversation, I’ve taught seminars including:“Sanctions For Evil: Coming To Terms With History”, “Who Turned Out The Enlightenment”, “How Classical Liberalism Cracked The Liberty Bell”, and “Where Clichés Fail: Abortion In Context”.
People must identify their principles before they can defend them. My goal is to help people clarify what they believe, understand better why they believe it, and rediscover the origin of those beliefs. These five questions start us along the path.
1. What do you believe about people and their place in society? This is not a list of things you support or that you want to see happen.
2 Why do you believe it? External reasons to believe–it’s what my folks taught or my friends think–are easily corrupted. If the justification comes from religion, remember that Christian Nationalists tout the same Bible.
3. Where does this belief come from? Every belief shapes society, so why do supporters choose one possibility over another? Rules, often unrecognized, determine what concerns do or don’t count in every set of beliefs.
4. What is society? Does society actually exist (emergent property), or is it simply a pattern formed by random individual actions like bird footprints on a mudflat (an aggregate sharing a common space)?
5. What determines the legitimacy of government, and what, in turn, is the duty of government to every individual?
We invited you to this page because your posts suggest that you dislike the answers to those questions that Trump and MAGA seek to impose. Since the 1950s the GOP, its supporters, the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundations have spent billions every election cycle to impose their answers to these questions. Every election cycle the Democratic party response has been to debate legislative policies, not principles. The Democratic party has been, in Spiro Agnew’s words, a “nattering nabob of negativism” railing against every conservative effort to protect society.
It might be disappointing that I will focus on things that may seem tangential: obscure terms, cognitive psychology, evolution, dead philosophers, and more. I understand the desire to hammer the far right with statements of truth and fact. So much of what they say is factually wrong. The far right knows they lie and doubles down because it works, distracts from their real efforts, and wears down the resistance.
What is more persuasive is the better story. That is the story that acknowledges the real problems MAGA exploits to gain power. That is the story that searches for the principles we share and explains the origin of those principles, because liberalism and conservatism are social creations. We know the story of who created them and why.
There is a difference between what I propose and Heather Cox Richardson’s posts, which I greatly admire. Her posts build an expansive knowledge, but each post stands alone. My project is an open classroom where people can drop in at any time. The material is a cumulative serial where class three depends on classes one and two. As commitments allow I plan to make one or two posts a week, each roughly 1,000 words. To help people who join after the start or need to catch up on missed posts, at regular intervals, maybe every five posts, I’ll consolidate that set in a new pdf.
So, welcome. I hope to see comments that expand, clarify, or correct what I offer. The goal is to discuss the foundations of belief, not to list every MAGA outrage. The requirement for participation is showing respect for people’s ideas and efforts. Thoughtful disagreements benefit both sides. Even if an argument is not “right”, considering it might keep us from saying something stupid in the future.
Welcome.
*Elevator pitch: I believe every person holds the same rights, and that through effort, learning, and cooperation every person can improve their position in life. It is the duty of government to protect those rights and opportunities. Position statement adds: Creating a society makes possible cooperation and investments that improve the lives of all its members. In turn, the society has two responsibilities: to protect its existence thereby preserving that general welfare and to ensure that every member has an equal opportunity to fully enjoy the benefits and opportunities that the society makes possible.
