Don's Home
Politics
Civil Discourse
|
Love Your Enemies | Civil Discourse |
On the politics page we discussed the political polarization common in 21st century politics.
The passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September 2020 prompted me to think about the subject of Civil Debate.
On a trip to India, they famously rode an elephant, with Scalia sitting up front. What about feminism? "It had to do with the distribution of weight," Ginsburg deadpanned slyly.
See: What made the friendship between Scalia and Ginsburg work - The Washington Post
John Kenneth Galbraith and William F. Buckley
In a 2010 web post about the juvenile name-calling by some of todays national politicians,
Deborah Boykin of Prattville commented:
"Maybe the debates between John Kenneth Galbraith and William F. Buckley from the 1970s should be made available on TV again. These men disagreed on policy just as vehemently as people do now, but they were able to debate their positions eloquently and civilly, using facts, statistics and educated opinions. The level of public discourse in this country today is stunningly low and it doesn't bode well for the future."Galbraith was a frequent guest on Buckley's conservative public affairs TV show Firing Line.
See YouTube examples:
Cambridge Union: William F. Buckley Jr. vs. John Kenneth Galbraith
William Buckley vs Keynesian Economist
Ruth Marcus on Michael in a PBS remembrance of Michael
Amna Nawaz asked Ruth, "You and Michael are on different ends of the political spectrum, but have this wonderful, which is rare these days. What was it that sustained that friendship?
Ruth: "Well, I hope it's not rare. And I'm not sure these days that we're at the ends of the political spectrum, and maybe that explains some of it.
But we disagreed profoundly and fundamentally about all sorts of questions about how government should act, when government should act. We could disagree about tax policy. We could disagree about foreign policy.
But there were two really important ways in which we agreed. The first was about the ends. We agree that the role of government and that the — more important, that the ends we're striving for as a society, was to lift up the downtrodden, to help those least fortunate, to provide for equality, to ensure the dignity of all human beings.
Gerson On evangelicals
There are many people who claim to be Christians in their political engagement. And one of the most basic principles of religious ethics is welcoming the stranger. I mean, how could this possibly be consistent with what we're seeing in Republican ideology right now?
I think evangelicalism have a particular problem right now. I mean, they're the people who argued, many of whom leaders argued, that character counts during the Bill Clinton years, and now character apparently doesn't count at all.
So, I think there's a deep tension here.
Politics is undermining and invading the credibility of religion itself.
On the war in Iraq he said "Are we going to be the first Western, Christian, pro-Israel occupying force, military occuping force of an Arab nation in that region?"
I for one never missed the PBS Newshour on Friday nights just to watch Shields and Brooks.
Links:
Honoring Mark Shields and his decades of political analysis
Mark Shields and the Best of American Liberalism | NY Times, Davis Brooks
Politics and Science
Links: