Back in the
days when I blogged at Townhall I regularly sparred with a group of rabidly
angry, quasi-libertarians. During one exchange
my adversary characterized a response I made as “knee-jerk,” essentially accusing
me of not thoughtfully considering the question or my answer before I responded. That’s a serious insult in my book, so I
immediately grabbed my keyboard to shoot back a denial and defend my comment,
but in the struggle to articulate my reply I came to the embarrassing
realization that he was actually right.
Dang. I hate it when that happens.
I don’t
recall the exact comment in question, only that it involved accepted
‘conservative’ lore and that daring to consider I was wrong also brought into
question my worldview which was partially premised upon this and other notions
that I’d long accepted as fact. That was
a pivotal moment in my blogging “career” and yes, I did concede to him that he
was right (on that ONE point!), because I happen to believe credibility matters. The experience taught me the importance of
taking the time to stop and think and not be so reflexive in debate. In the process I made a few alterations to
certain long-held beliefs that I took for granted, and learned the value of carefully
forming my own opinions instead of invoking standard partisan talking points.
Sadly - nay
tragically - we have become a nation
of people who by and large debate consequential topics with knee-jerk
thoughtlessness. The blogosphere,
opinion journals, Facebook and Twitter are often besieged by inane, misguided,
indefensible prattle that reveals a dangerous and destructive level of closed-mindedness,
inexcusable ignorance and blind devotion to precious prejudices. That’s not intended to be a blanket
condemnation of those mediums as there is plenty of worthy, thoughtful
discussion going on as well and that’s a great thing; but certainly the absence
of any minimum standards for participation means that self-policing humility is
in dangerously short supply. It used to
take work – and to certain audiences the demonstration of credibility – to
enjoy the privilege of sharing your thoughts with vast numbers of people. Now anyone can do so with a phone or computer,
but the heretofore unsung voices of wisdom that have been given life by these
tools are too often drowned out by those who spew nonsense. I think about the
carefully articulated essays and letters crafted by this country’s founding
fathers to debate and express their thoughts on the serious subjects of their
time and I just want to shake my head at the realization of how far we’ve
fallen in comparison. Am I just
glorifying a bygone time and a bygone people or is the disintegration real?
Look at the
de-evolution of speech occurring on the campuses of our “institutions of higher
learning,” where those who offer to come speak and who are willing to defend
their opinions are treated with hostility and violence by those who, in all likelihood,
have never heard these speakers articulate what they’re advocating. In liberal-run schools of all levels the mere
act of voicing an opinion is giddily applauded, as long as it’s the right
opinion of course. In these places where
objective thinking and debate are supposed to be taught to young people as part
of their passage to becoming adults, we instead see these young people encouraged
to crawl back towards the womb, where they will curl up and suck their thumbs in
their safe spaces or become tyrannical toddlers, screaming and hurling objects
when they don’t get their way. This is both the consequence and the future of
the knee-jerk nation. Gone are the days of Abraham Lincoln’s sage
advice: “Better to be silent and be
thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
After years of
watching news analysis shows where conservative and liberal guests are brought
on to debate the issues of the day, I have given up any hope of ever seeing one
side persuaded by the other side’s more compelling argument, even when that
argument contains facts and logic that are indisputable. Without missing a breath every salient point
is rejected out of hand, as if the speaker is on auto-pilot and just waiting to
regurgitate his own talking points. I
understand they’re getting paid, one way or another, to represent a certain
view no matter what, but I for one wouldn’t be able to stand the embarrassment
of standing my ground while my argument is shown to be a failure. But that’s just me.
Naturally readers
will be wondering, “What about Donald Trump?
Isn’t he a knee-jerk president, what with all the tweeting and all?”
To a certain
extent, I believe Trump is guilty of knee-jerk behavior, particularly when he
feels personally attacked; but let’s not confuse quick reactions with automatic,
thought-free reactions. If one has
watched for years as a rogue dictatorship like North Korea menaces its
neighbors and the U.S. with threats of attack and progresses closer and closer
to having nuclear weapons despite diplomatic efforts, it seems to me the thoughtful reaction, irrespective of
speed, would be to treat this serious threat with serious words and actions,
which is what Trump has done in my humble estimation. It is the refusal to modify one’s precious
prejudices about the sanctity of diplomacy in the face of an escalating threat that
strikes me as robotic, and therefore knee-jerk, under this scenario.
I don’t
expect that the tide will turn and thoughtful reflection will be back in vogue
any time soon. As with anything that
involves the Left, there’s a method to the madness. If one actually debates with seriousness and
sincerity one might have to concede that one is wrong, and then the mission to
co-opt people’s rights is jeapordized.
There’s too much at stake to risk that.
Thieves and other usurpers of liberty never debate and they never
concede any territory.
~CW
To leave a comment please follow the link to see this post at The Pesky Truth. I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.
