Consider Others’ Perspective — The Purple Balloon Chronicles Part 4

[This is the fourth part of an eight-part essay “The Purple Balloon Chronicles — Ending Our National Shouting Match”; in this part, I shall start discussing what the Left can do to start bringing an end to our national shouting match, which might help them advance their ideas and, more importantly, help foster a more healthy democracy. This is about what makes up the veritable “purple balloon” that needs to be floated.]

Adopt the other perspective. Reconciliation must start with considering perspective…not our own, but the perspective of those with whom we disagree. As David Foster Wallace discussed in his famed “This is Water” commencement speech, we must, first, become aware of our innate self-centeredness. We must then choose to look at our world not from the vantage point of those we agree with, but those with whom we disagree — perhaps even those we despise. After all, they may look at us with the same self-centeredness and harbor the same self-assured frustration and outrage and contempt with which we view them. We will only begin to understand the depth of their convictions, develop compelling counterarguments and begin to conceive of a viable consensus once we’ve done this.

For example, the Left proffers limitless data to support climate change, which is dismissed or ignored by the Right. The knee jerk reaction by the Left is that the Right does not care about the planet, but that does not make sense. Do we really think so little of our fellow Americans that we truly believe they don’t care about the continuing habitability of the Earth?

Perhaps the struggling blue collar workers who have gravitated to the Right have more immediate concerns like paying for groceries or making rent or paying their mortgage? Perhaps, coastal, predominantly Democratic communities threatened by flooding feel a more immediate danger than inland populations (which comprise most of the nation)? Perhaps rural America, surrounded by seemingly boundless nature and typically vulnerable to its overpowering whim, cannot readily conceive of a planet under siege by people (rather than vice versa)? Perhaps all of the above and then some. Perhaps none.

Or consider immigration, legal or illegal. The popular conception of immigration is that America is extending a helpful opportunity to struggling people from other nations, which is not untrue. We are indeed a wealthy nation with plentiful resources. And the Left will portray any limitation on immigration as cold-hearted, if not racist.

But that influx is comprised of many people who will compete for low-skill and blue collar jobs, not the white collar jobs of many on the Left, jobs protected by sometimes daunting licensing requirements, selective university backgrounds, entrenched social networks and a need to be near-fluent in English. Many of those immigrants will either be low-skill workers who can only compete for low-skill or blue collar jobs or higher-educated professionals who, because of the aforementioned barriers, will be compelled to also compete for those same jobs. In March 2017, CNN reported the following occupations are comprised of at least half immigrants, based on data from Pew Research Center: personal appearance workers (e.g., hairdressers, manicurists), agricultural workers, plasterers and stucco masons, sewing machine operators, agricultural workers, housekeeping. And, so the logic goes, greater supply of labor will suppress wages.

Whether or not immigrants, in fact, cause wages to stagnate is almost beside the point. Many blue collar workers who see their wages stagnating will look to assign blame to the most obvious target, which could very well be immigrants. Informing them that wages are also impacted by globalization, automation and declining unionization will only leave them feeling powerless. It is human nature (a) to dislike an inability to control your circumstances and (b) to be driven to pursue some — or any — course of action. In many instances, it could very well be scapegoating, which can breed hate and worse. As a society, it is our job to not just condemn scapegoating but help create a climate where scapegoating is less likely to arise in the first place.

This is not to say that any of these are the reasons the Right opposes climate protections or looser immigration policies; the national dialogue never gets far enough to dig past emotions and into facts and legitimate perceptions. Rather, all too often, the Left reflexively retreats to its predictable, inflexible corner and the Right reverts to its.

[end of part 4]