By Chris Satullo
In the civic dialogue work I do with the PA Project for Civic Engagement, we have a favorite two-part question. We pose it to encourage people to examine their blind spots.
Part 1: On an issue you really care about, do those who oppose your position ever say anything that makes some sense to you, that gives you pause, that makes you go, “Well, she kind of has a point there”?
Part 2: Is there any part of your own stance on that issue that causes you even the slightest bit of doubt or anxiety, that’s “a pebble in your shoe”?
Not everyone can come up with meaningful answers to these paired queries. But those who do often cite this exercise as a valued takeaway from a dialogue we’ve led.
It’s a useful discipline, forcing yourself to ponder these challenges honestly. I had to learn to do so in my 30s when I started in a post where this kind of candid self-examination was part of the job description: editorial page editor. I know it’s tough duty. But I’ve also seen how valuable it can be.
Here’s one reason why: We tend to be most vehement about the parts of our positions that, deep down, we’re least sure of. You defend most fiercely your weak points, not your strongholds. And once you’ve doubled down angrily on your least sound position, the place where it would most behoove you to reconsider and adjust, learning and common ground become that much harder to achieve.
Last Saturday, I laid out seven fair but probing questions that a liberal might ask a Trump voter who was willing to sit still for the conversation.
This week, it’s incumbent on me to turn the tables. I’ve tried, by an act of informed imagination, to lay out a set of fair questions a thoughtful Trump voter might ask a liberal, probing some of the weak points in left-of-center orthodoxy.
Now, I’m not by any measure a conservative; I’m somewhere a little left of center, if that tired old spectrum must be invoked. But what I try to do is seek out, in print or in conversation, views that challenge my own (from the right or from further left). I try to take in the fair points I hear or read and use them to adjust, broaden or deepen my views.
Here’s one of the key benefits of dialogue across divides that has been lost in the current toxic atmosphere: Listening to views that differ from your own is the best way to strengthen your own perspective. Wanting to silence divergent voices is a sign of weakness, not strength.
So, here goes. Seven fair questions for which Democrats would be wise to devise strong, fair-minded answers. All of them speak to pebbles I sometimes find in my own ideological shoes. They’re posed in my best effort to mimic the voices of thoughtful conservatives I know:
1) On immigration, I certainly get it that you think putting children in cages is wrong. It may surprise you, but so do I. But it’s always easier to say what you’re against than what you’re for. I’m guessing (hoping?) you really don’t think people from all over the world should be able to enter and leave the United States solely as they please. So, if you would, what are the basic principles and/or some specific policies you favor to regulate the flow of people into our country from what can sometimes be a dangerous and hostile world?
2) Self-reliance is a core American value for me and a lot of people I hang out with. This is why, when we see a Democratic debate stage filled with candidates promising free thisand free that to everyone, it bugs the heck out of us. Particularly because we’re not asking for free this or that. Yet we know those politicians will expect us to help pay to give that free stuff to others. Do you not agree that people value and take care of things a lot more when they have to work at least a little to get them, rather than being handed it all for free?
3) Wouldn’t you agree, if only a little bit, that American government has been run for decades by an inside-the-Beltway group of people – in both parties – who long ago lost touch with the stresses and challenges most Americans face in their lives every day? While a lot about President Trump’s behavior bothers me, I still find the way he calls B.S. on those elites to be refreshing and useful. Do you really want to go back to letting a coddled, arrogant, out-of-touch elite call the shots for the rest of us?
4) Again, while I could do without some of President Trump’s antics in this area, how can you argue against his economic record? Record low unemployment; record stock market highs fueling my retirement account (and probably yours); someone at least calling China on its dirty dealing and piracy on trade. Why change horses when the one you’re riding is on such a roll?
5) I know progressives who pride themselves on their openness to people of diverse views, backgrounds and identities. I’ve noticed, however, that this tolerance doesn’t always extend to two groups of people which sometimes overlap: (a) people who openly profess a sincere, Christian belief in God and (b) working-class whites whose tastes in food, dress, pastimes and pop culture tend to diverge from coastal preferences. I guess what I’m asking is: Don’t progressives sometimes violate their own professed values by showing ignorant bigotry against religious belief and by indulging in classist snobbery against working-class whites (particularly those from the South)? Please, show me my suspicion is wrong.
6) Let’s stick with religion for one more question: Don’t progressives frequently show a hypocritical double standard when judging faith-driven political activism? Didn’t they cheer when liberal pastors led civil rights, anti-war or no-nukes protests, then turn around and freak out about “separation of church and state” when different types of pastors led protests about abortion, gay rights or R-rated material on broadcast TV? Similarly, don’t they smile when urban African-American pastors invite Democratic candidates up to the altar on the Sundays before elections, but thunder about the onset of “sharia law” when evangelical pastors dare to endorse conservative candidates?
7) I get that America’s record on living up to the founding ideal of “all people are created equal” has a lot of blots on it when it comes to the treatment to blacks, women, Native Americans and other groups. But (again putting some of President Trump’s over-the-top remarks aside) isn’t it true that as a society we’ve made a lot of progress on many of those fronts over the last 50 years? When I hear some “woke” liberals talk, it sounds as if they believe things are as bad as they’ve ever been. That’s strikes me as flat wrong and makes me wonder whether what they seek is not true equal treatment and justice, but a turning of tables and revenge for all the sins of the past. Please, tell me I’m wrong and explain to me how.
Well, there they are. I think I could mount pretty good replies to most of these questions, but not all. On Nos. 5 and 6, I might just have to just concede: You’ve got us on that one.
What answers would you make to these seven questions?
Chris Satullo, a civic engagement consultant, is a former editorial page editor/columnist at The Philadelphia Inquirer, and a former vice president/news at WHYY public media in Philadelphia.
Many of these questions evidence the disease of liberal journalism: false equivalency – either both sides are equally guilty, or how can you question what I do when you also do something I don’t like. Center-left people tend to talk themselves into inaction, flagellating themselves for not being without sin. Don’t be so easily guilt-tripped. Other conservative positions are just a defense of bad behavior.
1) We had a pretty good system: interview asylum-seekers to decide if they should be allowed in. We just haven’t funded it (hey, Congress!). More immigration judges and better temporary housing while decisions are made. And elect Democrats to Congress so that we can pass immigration reform, which should include a “path” to citizenship for those already here. The fact so many people are here illegally is not entirely on them.
2) You may not ask for “free this and that,” but you’ve gotten it. Medicare, farm subsidies, tax exemptions, corporate welfare. Sure, people value what they work for, if they are fairly allowed to work for it and not be discriminated against. Not everyone would be taxed to, say, ease student loan debit, but the superrich would have to pay more in taxes. And about damned time, too (talk about people who get free this and that!).
3) Wake up. Trump calls B.S. on those elites while he is one (raking in money from his properties while president, a violation of the Constitution) and while appointing them to the cabinet and other government positions. If a “coddled, arrogant, out-of-touch elite” calls the shots, let’s ask why the voters continue to put them in office. Or maybe propose another way of running a democracy.
4) The economy has been doing great during his presidency. The extent to which he can take credit is debatable. Taking on China should be applauded, but I thought trade wars were good and so easy to win. Changing horses? If the economy were the only consideration in electing a president, I’d vote for Trump myself. Do I need to list all the ways he is a total failure as a president and how mentally ill and unfit he is for office?
5) Total false equivalency. We’re not talking about whether either side should be able to express their opinions. We’re talking about the opinions themselves. For example, why do people who claim to hold a sincere Christian belief in God, actually live lives contrary to his teachings? Wealth gospel anyone? And the South? By almost every economic, educational, and social measure, the South trails the rest of the country.
6) Again, total false equivalency. It’s not the political activism of conservative pastors I challenge; it’s those issues they espouse. For example, support for Roy Moore for the Senate? Your example of “sharia law” is a case in point. Who the hell is proposing sharia law for this country?
7) First, why do we have to keep “putting some of President Trump’s over-the-top remarks aside.” He is the damned president, leader of the people, with a bully pulpit no one else has (wish Obama would come all the way out of hiding and do some bullying himself – bet his positions would not be the progressive “equivalent” of Trump’s disgraceful, evil remarks). But to the point, things ARE pretty much as bad as they’ve ever been, just different: Sure, we have made progress over the last 50. We don’t lynch black people anymore! Hurray! We just deny them equal opportunity and steer a high percentage of them to jail. I’d support revenge, especially against those who seek to perpetuate the status quo racism and misogyny. Don’t we have a president accused of sexual assault by 20 women (wonder why he didn’t sue, as he promised?). And how about those lovable white supremacists, who are experiencing a resurrection in 21st century, exceptionalist America? Wow, we’ve come a long way.
Mr. Satullo’s Seven Fair Questions of last week got me thinking about pebbles in the shoes of right-wingers. So, here are seven probably-not-fair questions for Trump voters. We on the left aim not to silence divergent voices, but to understand them, as they really don’t make much sense, outside anger and grievance:
1) Most Trump supporters claim to be patriotic Americans and most people of any political bent agree Russia is America’s adversary across the world. So, how do you explain Trump’s relationship with Putin and Russia: his meeting in the White House with Kislyak and Lavrov with only Russian media present; his many meetings and phone calls with Putin without providing the American people with information on what was discussed; and his acceptance of Putin’s claim of no interference in the 2016 election?
2) The Wall! Trump repeatedly vowed that on Day One, the United States would begin construction of a “beautiful” wall. And that Mexico would pay for it! And that it would be easy! What he did not say was that if Mexico would not pay for it, he’d take money from projects benefiting our military families or force a government shutdown. So, you must not be happy with his failure to deliver on the central promise of his campaign (PS: His claims of building new sections are not true).
3) Candidate Trump ran on “draining the swamp.” But Trump holds the all-time record for cabinet turnover in a first term. Of 21 top White House and cabinet positions, nine turned over at least once during Trump’s first 14 months, compared with three at the same point under Clinton, two under Obama, and one under W. Did Trump fudge his promise by draining the swamp he created?
4) Some of us on the left think that conservatives are hypocrites who will say anything to win and are incapable of shame when they later flip flop. As a candidate, Trump promised he would eliminate the nation’s debt in eight years. Instead, he shoved through, without public hearings, a tax cut that will play a large part in budgets that could increase the U.S. debt to $29 trillion during those 8 years, according to Trump’s own budget estimates. Yet nary a peep from the right. Is it true that deficits only matter when Democrats are in power?
5) Everyone knows, even supporters, that the man lies up a storm every day. In a recent lie, Trump claimed that the reason for killing Soleimani was his plan to attack the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, but embassy officials there said they did not receive an alert commensurate with such a threat. This was a lie that could started a war (see No. 7), along with his claim that violence against Americans was “imminent,” when in fact he gave the go-ahead to kill Soleimani seven months ago. Is it OK that Trump repeatedly lies as long as he “gets things done”?
6) It’s generally understood that Trump sees his path to victory in 2020 by keeping his base stoked, angry, feeling disrespected, vengeful, and maybe even violent He has the formula down: Hold a rally with free MAGA hats; lie; call people names; blame the media; and make racist comments and retweet racist messages Why are his people so easily manipulated, duped, and aroused? Do Trump people totally lack self-respect? Or are they, to explain their attraction, just like him?
7) Trumpies hate “the elite”! If we understand elite to be “a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of society,” why would they be hated, rather than symbolize achievement? After all, Republicans, the party of the affluent, screw over the middle and lower classes all the time, with tax policy, attempts to shrink entitlements, and by shipping their sons and daughters off to war. Yet, right-wingers don’t hold it against the rich, because, we’re told, they all hope to be rich themselves one day. Why not aspire to be elite? It’s one way to get rich.
Bonus question) Some of my friends left of center believe that Trump supporters can be brought to their senses if only a non-Trumper would take them to lunch, ask some thought-provoking (OK, maybe patronizing) questions, and listen to what they have to say. Would you go to that lunch? It would be free