Last week my wife, Lisa, and I attended a short workshop led by the South Coast Interfaith Council introducing us to the work of the Braver Angels, a movement founded by John Woods. The main topic addressed at this event was depolarizing ourselves. We were asked to break up to small subgroups and discuss our own tendencies to maintain polarizing views of people that think differently from us. The driving force behind Braver Angels is to bring people together with different viewpoints (such as political perspectives) and have them talk to another in a respectful accepting manner.
Although the group was multiethnic, it appeared politically they all were pretty much progressives as one of them proudly admitted. Unfortunately, it is rare when conservatives and liberals convene in one group these days. People congregate in places where they feel most comfortable, where, in short, they can be accepted for their ideas and where they do not have to hide their true beliefs. A deeper understanding of the other side cannot be addressed in that side’s absence. Moreover, the power of social media, where inflammatory remarks attacking the “other,” serve only to reinforce this trend of shielding one’s own beliefs.
I am not saying that movements, such as Braver Angels, are not of value. Thus, for example, an underlying premise of the teachings of Braver Angels is not to attack the messenger: That is linked to the ad hominem (literally, to the man) argument fallacy; rather, it is the content of that message that can be discussed and judged. Falling prey to the ad hominem argument, allows the interlocutor to assassinate the character of the other. It reinforces violence as a means of dealing with the words spoken by the other side and renders our constitutional rights to freedom of speech impotent. We, as a country, do not want to emulate the political movements led by Hitler, Stalin and Mao in the past, or Putin and Xi in the present, where the people under those leaders who expressed their differences either wound up dead or incarcerated.
The murder of Charlie Kirk, the conservative reformer who tried to speak to both sides on college campuses, is emblematic of the grave danger Americans face for expressing their political views. Charlie Kirk is not the first to have been attacked for where he stood on controversial matters. No, I am afraid there have been others, both left and right, on the political spectrum. But, as Utah Governor Spencer Cox declared, this last act of violence may represent a watershed moment in the history of America. A watershed or a turning point indicating we as a country can stop the drift downward of the listing ship of America or our country, like the Titanic, may sink in its political mire of hate.
Because the countervailing winds are strong, it will not be an easy task! In the social media’s hateful content along with political leaders such as Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, a Democrat, and South Carolina GOP Representative Nancy Mace both of whom pinned the blame of Charlie Kirk’s death on the other side. Even worse, is President Trump’s vows to punish his opponents, namely, the radical left. When both sides are culpable, casting blame on one side is not the way to heal the hurt felt by all. On the other hand, Governor Cox exceeded the performance of his colleagues in positions of political leadership. Upon hearing of the assassination of Charlie Kirk he said: “My young friends out there, you are inheriting a country where politics feels like rage. It feels like rage is the only option. Your generation has an opportunity to build a culture that is very different from what we are suffering through right now, not by pretending differences don’t matter, but by embracing those differences and having hard conversations.”
Ezra Klein, a highly respected liberal columnist for the New York Times, who speaks to a large audience of like-minded people, also took the high road in interpreting the events surrounding the assassination of Charlie Kirk. He gave his opinion on the op-ed page of the New York Times by writing: You can dislike much of what Kirk believed and the following statement is still true: Kirk was practicing politics in exactly the right way.” Klein pointed out that his opinion on college campuses offset the pervasive leftist influence of so many of these universities offering young people a different lens to formulate their political opinions.
Political disagreements may become intense and emotional but the heat from them should never rise to violent acts. The New York Times Editorial Board indicated that thirty-four percent of college students said they supported using violence in some circumstances to stop a campus speech, a figure up from twenty-four percent in 2021. This is a dangerous trend that needs to be addressed by the press, influencers on social media, parents and, finally, our political leaders. Rather than creating safety spaces where those of like mind can meet “safely” on college campuses, groups like Braver Angels can teach students how to depolarize their thoughts and begin listening to the other side. This will allow for a more meaningful conversation with those who have opposing views than we have.
Dr. Bernard F. Natelson 