We had not succeeded in our many attempts to comprehend the empirical dynamics of the extent of hostility and virtual hatred generated by the societal existence of divergent political beliefs. As noted in earlier writings, the American forefathers, maintained the expectation (now perceived, by us as pollyannaish), that within the context of the new Nation’s liberty and freedom of speech, informed citizens would interactively and socially engage in principled debate on the issues of the day and that the results of such dedicated debates would inform Government policy, thus achieving the desired goal of the philosophically intended, “Government, by and for the People.”
Alas, just the contrary occurred. As we have extensively written, differences in opinion led to acrimonious societal divisiveness to the extent of “tribal” groups sharing a mutual opinion in a state of hostility or “cold war” with other groups of disparate views. Rather than interactive discussion and attempts at accommodation, the Nation incubated a palpably overt hatred of individuals of divergent opinions. It was no longer a singular to experience familial strife and the discontinuance of long-term friendships founded in the divisive strain generated by hotly contested issues, such as abortion, gun control immigration, tax inequity, vaccination, racial and gender equality, homosexuality, and gender issues, educational policy, religionism, global warming and the environment, the need for governmental regulatory supervision of societal health and safety, and religious influence in civil government.
Political influencers, most notably, the democracy-corrupting influence of Donald J. Trump, promoted and encouraged such rancorous division benefiting from his cult-like support by the disgruntled, reductionist populists (MAGA) in the Nation. Negativity, conspiratorial ideations, and atavistically hateful approaches to societally important issues such as equality, racial, ethnic, and gender, tactically served Trump’s autocratic purpose of societal alienation and hostility which defined and strengthened his political influence notably, among the Nation’s large inventory of less-than-adequately educated populists. The reputed just and liberally enlightened, modern American society was reduced to evincing a divisive, rancorous, mistrustful conglomeration of mistrustful and adamant oppositionists.
Our Nation has historically enjoyed success from its aspiration toward the universally accepted idiom “E Pluribus Unum,” and to true equality and rational cohesion. Our present writing is a sincere utilitarian suggestion as to the amelioration of the prevailing negativity and divisive rancor, and hopefully. restoration to its prior condition.
It may be useful at this juncture, to momentarily change the subject, in aid of our radical-seeming, perhaps simplistic, and ubiquitously applicable suggestion employing an explanation of our title, which has reference to the common roof-top phenomenon known as a “weather vane.” As universally known and recognized, the weather vane is a simple device, installed on the roof of a building structure (usually residential) which, by its simple mobility, indicates the general direction of the wind current. The object often is presented in the configured shape of a chicken but is also seen in various other farm-related configurations. The singular function is to indicate the extant direction of the wind current, in concert with its simultaneous direction. The salient point is that the weather vane functionally changes in sync with the changing direction of the wind current and serves as an analogy, to the dynamics of our contextual theme.
Our thematic suggestion is proposed in aid of the existential need to ameliorate the divisive rancor existing among our citizenry in theory is inarguably simplistic. Nevertheless, at the risk of an indictment for being reductive, we will sincerely reveal it, but admittedly, with the caveat that its implementation would require substantial thought and dedicated ingenuity.
It may be salubrious to suggest that American citizens make an earnest attempt to concentrate on what they approve of, in contrast to what they vehemently oppose. With the appropriate impetus, the change could be as facile as the shifting of the weather vane responsive to the alteration in breeze direction. The eternal angry opposition to principles deemed detestable has proven not to be productive of concession or adjustment of adamantly adverse opinion. Angry opposition or vehement rejection is not, by any degree of measurable utility, nearly as useful and accommodating as overt and positive statements of belief. This change of direction might well encourage responsible debate instead of blind anger and afford the result of a socially acceptable community, s mutually seeking positive improvement and advancement.
A change of the National weather vane to a cooling breeze would be useful and immeasurably preferable to the continuance of a stagnant and heated atmosphere.
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 