Seeing Past Our Differences To Our Common Values

As a nation today, it would appear that we are as politically divided as we have ever been. There are even people now calling for a second civil war. Disagreements over public policy have resulted in not merely heated debate or uncivil discourse, but in violence and harm to both people and property.  One has only to go onto any major news or social media outlet and casually read through the comments to come to the sobering realization that human regard for not just other ideas or values, but for other people has reached a dangerous low.  

Given what we as a species have been through over the centuries and millennia, much of which being well documented in history and understood by the masses, it is disheartening to witness the animosity from members of one political group to another.  Anyone with as much as a casual command of history understands that the contemporary path we are on is not one of prosperity but one of destruction.  Some would even go so far as to say our inability to learn from our own past, our repeated inability to set aside our emotions and biases, so that we could come together to solve our differences is evidence for a lack of hope in sustaining an orderly and peaceful society for any length of time.  It certainly speaks to our imperfect nature. 

While we are definately not without our faults, tragedies, or challenges, never in history has a people had it so good as those of us alive today in western society.  Never before have we been so immune to the ill will of others, so protected from violence or oppression, or so prosperous.  Even most of the poor today live in better conditions, and to better standards, than the wealthy did a couple generations ago.  Never in history have the poor had such easy access to technology, healthcare, and government or private charity.  The fact that even in a time such as this, that we are still so politically and morally divided is evidence that it is not technology, national wealth, better healthcare, or the ability to easily communicate on a global scale that makes a strong cohesive society, but something seemingly less material.

As divided as we are, and as socially acceptable as it has become to manifest our political differences in the form of ill will and harm towards one another, it could be argued that we are not nearly as fundamentally divided as it may initially appear.  If one were to look past the more superficial issues and more closely examine the core values that are driving the division between us, he or she might realize that we are much better aligned on these core ideologies than we are on the superficial issues that dominate our national attention.  

To illustrate this, examine any of the hot button topics of the last several election cycles.  Gun rights come immediately to mind.  This is an extremely polarizing debate where one side advocates for the freedom to own guns and to defend themselves and the ones they love.  They see gun ownership as a means to their security.  The opposing group views widespread gun ownership as a threat to their security for fear these weapons could fall into the wrong hands.  At the core of the issue, what both parties desperately want is security.  What they disagree on is what security means, how best to achieve it, and who is ultimately responsible for their security.  

Government welfare, in all of its various forms, from providing housing, basic income, healthcare, or iPhones is another hot topic that quickly divulges into name calling and hair pulling.  Proponents of government assistance believe that by the government providing the basic needs of its citizens it is providing the essential freedom to each.  They believe that individual freedom comes from not having to worry about the basic necessities of life, and that it is the role of government to ensure this. 

Opponents of governments provisioning the people’s basic needs view the various welfare programs as creating a dependency on government for not only the basic necessities of life, but ultimately of dependency on government for life itself.  They believe that government welfare replaces freedom with dependency and is therefore destructive, not just to the freedom of the taxpayer who must fund it, but even more so to the freedom of the people who depend on it.  What both groups want is freedom, not just for themselves but for everyone.  What they disagree on is what freedom means, how best to achieve it, and who is ultimately responsible for it.  

Another hot button topic that has been simmering in the background, and recently emerged with greater passion amidst the covid-19 pandemic, is the issue of vaccinations. Advocates of vaccinations site the eradication of many of the diseases of the past and the need for its widespread use to be effective on a national scale as reason to mandate their use by law. Many of these advocates would even accept the use of government force to vaccinate individuals against their will or to withhold the right to enter the workforce, to attend school, or to withhold other benefits of society to those who choose not to comply.

For all the evidence to the benefits of vaccinations, there is no shortage of evidence to their potential dangers or ineffectiveness. Dangers range from the use of trace amounts of potentially harmful substances, which could be linked to other potential health problems, to cases such as the polio vaccine which actually gave some people polio instead of preventing the disease. Some vaccines appear to show poor effectiveness against certain resistant strains. While vaccines are distinguished from “drugs” by the manner in which they operate, both are approved for use by the FDA. One has only to watch the myriad of television commercials advertising compensation from lawsuits due to harm or death by substances once approved by the FDA as safe and effective to understand there is an inherent risk to any substance whether a drug or vaccine.

The point is that there are always two sides to every story and if one looks passionately at only one of these sides it is easy to lose touch with the other viewpoint. Proponents of vaccinations view it as a means to their security from disease and illness. They view opponents of vaccinations as a threat to that security. The opponents of vaccinations on the other hand are more concerned with the potential dangers or unknowns of vaccinations than the benefits. They view mandatory vaccinations as a threat to not only their freedom but also to the security of their health. Subsequently, they view those advocating for the their mandatory use as a further threat to that security. Again, what both parties what is to be secure in their own lives.

Of course, there are many other issues in debate throughout our nation, these are just a few examples to illustrate the bigger picture. It is outside the scope of this argument to determine the rightness or wrongness of vaccinations, gun rights, or government welfare, only to show that the core issues behind each of these topics, as well as the vast majority of political topics that we so frequently spar over, is the foundational aspects of freedom and security.  

These are the two core values that each of us, on any side of any political debate desperately want, freedom and security.  These are the values of our nation.  It is these two things that unite all of us under the American flag.  It is for these two things that all Americans, irregardless of their political views, religious beliefs, cultural or racial heritage, or gender can call each other brother or sister and it is for these two things that countless people have given their lives.  

What is necessary in order to heal our differences and to once again come together as a nation, so that we can solve the challenges of our day, is to understand what these two core values of freedom and security are, what they are not, who is responsible for them, and how best to achieve them. If we can align on these foundational elements of freedom and security, we will be equipped to apply our understanding of them to each of the many issues dominating our political attention. As we do this, the passionate disagreement between the less foundational elements of our lives will fade away and more agreeable courses of action will begin to emerge.