Man in the Middle:
A Collection of Essays by a Red, White and Blue American
-
Introduction: Why I Have Written These Essays
There is no lack of authors who write social and political commentary which is basically what I’m doing here. The obvious question then is why have I written this collection of essays? Do I possess some unique ideas or approaches that others have not discussed or expressed in an either more fluid manner, a more engaging style or from a more educated standpoint? I am sure that there are other writers who have more real-world experience when it comes to hard-core policymaking or societal improvement crusading. I do think it is important to provide a brief explanation as to why I have undertaken this effort of composing fifty essays.
The use of social media is now a primary way for public discourse to occur. It is an outlet for communication which millions of Americans regularly access. The ability for so many people to communicate with each other instantaneously is a recent technology that has become available to humanity. It is truly amazing. Billions of people around the globe now have access to express their opinions, whether these are well thought-out commentaries or impulsive responses. My concern is that those who are controversial and loud, as well as those on the edge of the political spectrums, receive significant attention on social media. Outrageous statements and proclamations, as is human nature, attract more viewers and readers (or followers) which lead to more advertising revenue for social media and online companies. So, I do give social media organizations, such as Facebook and Google, some credit for attempting to police false statements and hate speech, but the truth is that there is a financial disincentive to significantly rein in the social media environment as it currently exists. We find that in this environmental framework, those who are polite and address issues or political disagreements with a commonsense approach, do not get the level of attention as those who are loud and angry. No, the voices of reason and calm are all too often drowned out in the hyped-up world of social media.
Even the traditional media outlets from which Americans get their daily intake of news seem to be presenting news stories in a more biased format than in the past. I would say Fox News sets the bar extremely low as far as the network’s performance in presenting news in an unbiased manner, per its constant right-wing rants. However, MSNBC is not far behind with its leftist slant, and even CNN often shows its more Democrat leanings. As I am writing this, I stop to pause to view a discussion on CNN about Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida flying Venezuelan migrants to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts. It becomes clear that the host and the Democrat strategist are on the same team against the sole Republican participant. American news media outlets, pandering too often to one side of the political spectrum, do not sufficiently support the dissemination of objective facts and civil debate.
I believe that the loud voices which seed distrust and turmoil on our political landscape do not represent most Americans who demonstrate in their daily lives that we are a fair-minded people. Yes, the truth is that Americans cannot agree on much these days - whether it is to wear masks during the pandemic, to believe in Climate Change, and on even what our children should or should not learn in school. I admit that we face intensive divisiveness in our nation on political issues, but there remains a basic ideal of fairness that most Americans share together. Our democratic society has instilled in us a sense of fairness that, in my opinion, will be what guides us to reaffirming a culture of interactions that is based on reason, compassion, and compromise.
I now return to the question as to why I set out to undertake this writing endeavor. I will describe below a bit about myself to more completely answer this question, but primarily I am of the opinion that to successfully oppose the multiple angry voices that are being expressed right now, that it will take many of us choosing to communicate, through various methods, the need to adopt civility as we engage in social and political discourse. A significantly larger number of citizens, than is currently the case, need to communicate a message of collaboration and cooperation to begin the process of addressing the bitter divisiveness in America. We can back off the ledge of more divisiveness, and even violence, in our American society if we have a groundswell of insistence on mutual respect in our open political debates. I am but one citizen, but my goal is to encourage many others to join in this civil discourse with an emphasis on “civil.” We must collectively set an intention to treat others with dignity and respect in all communicative interactions.
As far as what I think I can bring to the table in this pursuit of achieving more civility and peaceful coexistence for all in our free society, I do have, I think, a unique perspective that adds value to the discussion. I am a North Carolinian with a New York, Jewish background. I live in a southern town of mostly devout Christians, and I have learned to respect my differences from others when it comes to religion. I am a Democrat who lives in a suburban (what used to be rural) mostly Republican, conservative town. However, I work in the nearby city/metropolitan area that seems so increasingly liberal in its policies, that the culture appears to me to be intolerant of anyone but those on the extreme left. I live where European whites are the majority, but in the city where I work (like other cities across the nation), there is a majority minority population, with African Americans and Hispanics in combination now outnumbering the number of white residents. As with other metropolitan areas in our nation, the city in which I am employed is composed of racial, religious, and political characteristics that are strikingly different from the nearby suburbs. It is not lost on me that I can drive a mere thirty to forty minutes and the population makeup can differ significantly from where I began my trip. Indeed, I admit that where I reside, and the location where I work are geographic factors that have shaped my outlook and politics. I work and live my life as both a member of majority and minority groups, depending on the situation and location.
Based on my identity and experiences, I have developed a great desire to communicate the message to others that protecting minority rights is just not our moral imperative as Americans, but protecting minority rights is the act of protecting the rights of all citizens. Let me explain. We live in an ever-increasingly diverse society. Each of us may experience even in the briefest of moments being the minority in the group. This recognition at the individual level can lead to a more compassionate world in which we all play a role in protecting individual liberties. What makes the United States such a unique and ethical society is that we have democratic rule by the majority, yet from our nation’s inception, there has been a moral emphasis on respecting the rights of minorities.
My background and daily experiences have led me to have four core political approaches or beliefs that I endorse:
-
Often both sides of the political spectrum have valid points in their arguments that all sides must concede.
-
Compromising on issues and coming to the political middle ground is the best way to create a free society in which everyone feels that they have been heard. We take the reasonable arguments of both sides of an issue and come to a decision in which no one gets everything that they want, but a decision in which most get something, and hopefully everyone comes to understand (if not fully accept) the valid viewpoints of others.
-
As alluded to above, our Founding Fathers set up a unique governmental system in which we have the rule of the majority through free elections, but we also place a deep emphasis on individual freedoms. Our Constitution is the closest written document, in my opinion, to a perfect guide for creating a free and just society. However, without our nation’s citizens throughout our history standing up to protect this free way of life, this most revered document would simply exist as a two-hundred-year-old printed intention of liberty – a theoretical dream of freedom that never actually blooms to fruition. All Americans have a sacred responsibility to ensure the continued adherence to our Constitution and governmental systems created by our Founding Fathers.
-
The safety of all citizens (and families) is essential for the functioning of a free society. This includes physical safety from outside threats (national security), as well as safety from local crime. I would say it also includes access to housing, health care, and safe transportation. Citizens and governmental representatives must work together to create a safe environment for everyone. Safety is essential for our society to exist, and it is the foundational brick holding up our inalienable rights, as stated in our Declaration of Independence, to “…life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (US 1776).
My middle-of-the-road, compromising approach to societal problem-solving is why I refer to myself so often as a “man in the middle.“ We can move past blue and red state divisions to re-establish our Founding Fathers’ ideal of a “United States of America.” We have a history of uniting under our flag with its red, white, and blue colors. The pride that countless Americans have experienced when putting their hands over their hearts, pledging their allegiance to our red, white, and blue flag, comes from that almost sacred understanding that our nation at its core is just, good, and bound in liberty. Thus, my contention is that we should not think of America as separate red or blue states, but view them collectively as “red, white and blue” states. We can do this and silence any troublesome talk of civil war and prevent any future acts of insurrection. This is my explanation as to why I consider myself to be a “red, white and blue” American. The American ideal is one of looking toward the future with the most positive intentions. This can be seen in President Biden’s continued message and recent statement that, “America’s best days are ahead of us, not behind us.” This positive American vision has always crossed party lines as with President Reagan’s common reference to “the shining city on a hill.” We must all do our part to ensure this future of peace and prosperity for all Americans. It is this American idealism and pride when we look at our red, white and blue flag with its promise of freedom for all, that we can collectively embrace.
One of my historical heroes is President Abraham Lincoln who led our nation through the bloody and costly U.S. Civil War. There are those who say the United States has not been so divided, as it is today since those dark days in the early 1860s. President Lincoln, from my perspective, not only worked closely with the United States military to ensure victory in the war but provided the guidance necessary to ensure that the national identity of our relatively young nation remained intact. Maintaining our collective, national vision was no small feat, I argue, during and soon after a time when our nation was being ravaged with internal war. President Lincoln’s sincere communicative approach with the American people, in my opinion, solidified an American theme that our national love of freedom and democracy must always trump any intense political disagreement of the day.
Now, I do view my opinions as politically moderate – more liberal on social issues with a more conservative approach on economic and safety issues. However, some may consider a given opinion of mine as too far left or too far right to be on the middle of the political spectrum. I would encourage others to grade me as they wish. My primary goal is not to defend that all of my arguments or rationales always fall on the exact middle of the political spectrum, but to be part of a greater civil discourse that will lead to outcomes reached through compromise. Typically, decisions that come about through the democratic process of compromise are somewhere close to the middle ground based on the very nature of negotiation, but not always. When we live in a world of such polar opposite viewpoints, this process of give and take is the key to creating a more unified, peaceful society. Normalizing this process is the goal. We want to establish (or re-establish) a culture of compromise that leads to agreements that are not exactly down the political middle, but that all sides can live with so that we can all co-exist in relative peace.
In closing my introduction, I want to encourage others who have been afraid to speak out for fear of aggressive reaction from those who thrive in divisiveness to step forward. I certainly must be honest in admitting that I have been in this group, often hesitating to speak out for fear of disapproval or rejection. It seems at first that it is easier to stay quiet rather than make waves, but then we experience that continual inner calling to stand up for what is right. At some point, we come to the realization that to achieve inner peace, we must speak up and take non-violent, but resolute action. As more of us voice the need for middle-of-the-road approaches, those on either side of the political spectrum will get aggressive. However, our collective of moderate voices can offset these uncivil communications and, sadly at times, calls for violence which are threats to our American way of life.
The very idea of our Freedom of Speech in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights establishes the basic right to free expression. Now, this does not mean that others do not have the right to strongly argue and debate in opposition to our opinions, but that the exchange of ideas should occur with some level of civility and certainly without any fear of violent reactions. We seem to have forgotten a key component of our democratic system, which is that after intense debate, we all come together as Americans committed to protecting every citizen’s right to disagree with one another. This final step after the highly emotional verbal confrontations is what has been missing recently in our civil interactions.
One of my favorite movies is The King’s Speech. It was such an inspirational, biographical account of someone who had to overcome an embarrassing speech impediment (stuttering) in order to have his voice heard by the world. The movie provides a general historical account of King George of Great Britain overcoming his challenge through perseverance and the right support, so he could communicate effectively to his people. King George’s leadership, though ceremonial, was desperately needed at a time when the British people were facing the fascist threat of Hitler during World War II. One of my favorite lines from the movie was during a back-and-forth argument the king was having with his speech therapist and friend, Lionel Logue (The King’s Speech). Mr. Logue virtually shouts to King George the question (paraphrasing), “Why should anyone listen to you?” The king responded emphatically (paraphrasing), “Because I have a voice,” (The King’s Speech).
We must never forget regardless of our “standing” in society based on economics, education, or social status, that we all have a voice. Through these essays, this is my way to express and share my voice.
Works Cited
Biden, Joseph R., President of the United States (inaugurated on 20 Jan. 2021). “Remarks by
President Biden on Bidenomics.” The White House, 14 Sept. 2023,
www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/09/14/remarks-by-president-
biden-on-bidenomics-largo-md/.
Reagan, Ronald, President of the United States (20 Jan. 1981 – 20 Jan. 1989). “Farewell Address
to the Nation.” Ronald Reagan Presidential Library & Museum, 11 Jan. 1989,
www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/farewell-address-nation.
The King’s Speech. Directed by Tom Hooper, performances by Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush,
The Weinstein Company, 2010.