A good friend's Facebook thread on Trump recently included this plea by a friend of his: "I appreciate and respect your perspective but I support Trump - why is it not ok to support him? We agree to disagree."
No, it's not OK to hold any opinion just because it's yours. So called "opinions" that fly in the face of facts are not "OK".
I think there has been a flight to opinion as the ultimate defense of thought that defies logic. More and more I hear this line of argument: "Well, that's just my opinion so we'll have to agree to disagree." Climate change is not a matter of opinion. The age of the universe is not a matter of opinion. Believing in creationism isn't a matter of opinion.
Preferring cubism over Impressionism is a matter of opinion. But you cannot just say you support Trump in the face of overwhelming evidence of him being unfit to serve, fold your verbal arms over your chest and say, "well, I respect your perspective, but I still support him--why is it not ok to support him?" It's not "ok" because your argument for giving him the top job leading the free world fails the test of logic and reason again and again and again.
I'm not railing again Trump (this time). I'm railing against this lame retreat from reason to the "opinion defense." Everyone is entitled to her opinion, ergo if I label a fact-based decision as "my opinion" I can make uncomfortable facts disappear faster than Samantha on Bewitched. Too often I hear people retreat to this cozy fact-free garrison when their "feelings" clash with reality.
If, on the other hand, the friend-of-a-friend I quote above holds that,"Well, Trump has no qualifications traditionally possessed by Presidents, but I think it's time we shift from an internationalist, globalized economy back to the isolationist policy that guided us though the early 20th Century...and I think we need to deport 11 million illegal immigrants and build a wall on the southern border al la The Great Wall of China from millennia ago...so that's why I support Trump", I'd respect his position.
So no, it's not "ok" to cast your vote for a candidate because your opinion told you so. That's cool if you're buying a suit or a movie ticket. But the sacred duty of voting for your elected representatives requires you to marshal reason and logic and rationality. Leave your opinions for art. Politics is reality and reality demands you face facts head-on.
There appears to be conflicting, "evidence," on both sides. There is no 100% indisputable evidence that identifies the precise cause of climate change. The definition of, "fit to serve," similarly, has no universally accepted standard, save perhaps the minimum age and citizenship requirements. Therefore, in the absence of indisputable, 100% accepted factual evidence, the default is an opinion-based consensus. Sadly, popular culture is ALL about feelings, which further blurs the perception of reality. The level of logic-based decision making you suggest acceptable is ideal. However, that requires one to assume personal responsibility in becoming educated and thoughtful in developing reasonable positions. As we move further and further away from a culture that reinforces personal responsibility and accountability, toward a nanny-state that provides and entitles, the discipline required to formulate logical conclusions will be nothing but a distant memory.
ReplyDeleteWe routinely rely on reason and logic in the absence of indisputable factual evidence. But that's not opinion in the sense I'm referring to. We weigh all available facts and decide on the preponderance of available evidence. And while "fit to serve" is a subjective test, it doesn't necessarily follow that assessing fitness is a matter of opinion. Fitness must, if democracy is to flourish, be evaluated based on facts like policies, past behavior, demonstrated temperament, and the like. And as for achieving the ideal, yup, that's what I'm asking for! We've got to stop slouching towards an ethic wherein feelings=facts.
ReplyDelete