These days, it’s not about right and wrong – it’s about confusion

It is amazing to me that we make any progress in America, especially in California where change requires a two-thirds majority vote.  Everyone has an opinion and every opinion is held to count. In earlier times, there were fewer opinions – not in number but in diversity. Until the ’60s, things were a lot more straight forward. You had black and white issues. There was a clear national consensus of right and wrong. There was democracy and communism. There were clear heroes and clear villains. National pride meant that you were either “for us or against us,” and you would never hear the billion other arguments that pervade our culture today – serving to confuse issues into stagnancy, preventing progress as certainly as it prevents regress. Without passing judgment on the validity of any of these groups, let me say that the average person needs to go to school just to be kept up to date on the myriad of “special interest groups” that make up the fabric of our modern times. The same is true in order to understand the legislation that now governs every aspect of an issue. We have to classify everything with a label in order to better understand it, even if we wind up not understanding it at all. Republicans used to be Republicans and Democrats used to be Democrats. And then there was that other group of Independents, which secretly more and more people classify themselves as in order to avoid being labeled a Republican or a Democrat during these conflicted times. We have senators changing sides and we even have a conflict in the ideology. Wasn’t conservatism a Republican attribute; now there are conservative Democrats amidst the moderates and wholly liberal. It was suggested that those middleground types be called “Republocrats” or “Depublicans” as a way to avoid the latent confusion. I’m sure there would be much disagreement over that idea. We have “intellectuals,” “blue-collar workers,” “movers and shakers,” “religious extremists,” “right-wingers,” “left-wingers,” along with all the contemporary “jocks,” “geeks,” “punks,” “goths,” “emos” and more. It can get confusing. We also have multiple sub-categories, groups such as “gay, lesbian and transgender” people who have attained a greater public visibility recently. We like our groups. As much as we dislike class differences, we wrap our social groupings around us like a blanket that protects us from our insecurities. Groups allow timid voices to be heard, and groups can demand change. Equally, groups can hide cowardice and prejudice and it is certainly a lot easier to be ignorant within a group. With all the diverse and often contradictory groupings exerting influence over social and political movement, it is surprising that we can find enough consensus to move forward at all on any issue. Everyone is right, has the right to be right or deserves to be right. No one likes compromise anymore as this is a sign of weakness. Every city in America, Clayton and Concord being no exception to this rule, has tackled issues that have produced an explosion of commentary and angst – both in favor and against the issue at hand. In every case, much time, endless discussions and public forums have allowed the citizenry to express their views and demand whatever concessions they felt appropriate to their cause. What used to be a simple decision made over the course of a day or a week turns into years, with much division within the community eroding the friendly atmosphere that once existed. A recent trend in America has been to challenge the result of an election through the courts. If doubt can be applied to the issue, especially in the area of affecting minority or special interest rights by claiming a violation of constitutionality, more often than not these issues can ride all the way to the Supreme Court. It never used to be that way. You used to have your day, make your vote and abide by the result. Was that honor, respect or just common decency? Whatever you believe, it was the mark of a simpler time when the expectations of unity were far stronger. In California, we never get anything done because of the two-thirds majority rule needed to change things. Measure D’s bid for parcel tax funds to aid the local school district failed to get a two-thirds majority, although it would have passed by a popular vote. A move is underway to remove the two-thirds majority rule; unfortunately that will also require a two-thirds majority to pass. It is interesting to note that despite all this, Americans are generally idealists – holding true to the notion of vast ideological unities ... “one nation under God with truth and justice for all.” We just need diverse and oppositional arguments along the way to confuse us, delay us and annoy us to such a degree that we ultimately stay home and don’t vote at all because by then we don’t want to deal with it. MisterWriter Printed in the 6/12/09 issue of The Clayton Pioneer - Click to read