"I SIGNED the partial birth [abortion ban]," President Bush declared in the second presidential debate. "My opponent voted against the ban." No, Sen. Kerry retorted, that's an oversimplification. "I'm against partial-birth abortion, but you've got to have an exception for the life of the mother." When given a chance to rebut, the president proceeded to offer the mantra which illustrates his ideological disconnect with reality: "Well, it's pretty simple when they say: Are you for a ban on partial birth abortion? Yes or no? And he was given a chance to vote, and he voted no. And that's just the way it is."
And that's just the way it is. Terrorists are evil, standardized tests reveal everything, marriage is between a man and a woman, and, oh, would you like some wood?
Perhaps more disconcerting than Bush's pointed attack on nuance is the fact that at least 50 percent of Americans agree with him. We have entered a political climate where depth is bad, complexity is bad and an enlightened position is bad. The absurd idea that a 10-word answer contains sound policy is frighteningly popular.
How can such a clearly unviable worldview -- one that privileges absolute declarations over ones which touch on intricacy -- have such a powerful foothold in American politics? While the Bushian answer would be "oh, they're all crazy," it is worth assuming for a moment that tens of millions of people are not collectively psychotic. Treating them as rational actors, it becomes apparent that there are socializing forces at work in America that push an understanding of the world in dualistic terms.
Consider that the current generation of policymakers grew up surrounded by the Cold War. America versus the Soviet Union. Democracy versus communism. Freedom versus oppression. These are the paradigms which dominated our institutions, and these are the paradigms which are being applied on the war on terrorism. Yet there is a fundamental contradiction in this procedure, because in today's context, those paradigms are counter-productive.
Treating terrorists as evil madmen marginalizes the bulk of them whom are acting (in their minds) rationally, and hinders efforts to get at the root causes of terrorism. Of course, any politician who said this would be immediately castigated as soft on terror. As a result, there is little attempt to fight or even understand this conflict in its most essential terms -- a war on existing terrorists and a war to prevent new ones.
Exacerbating this simplistic dichotomy are the stark Christian ideals of good and evil, holy and unholy. Examples of the "war on complexity" can be seen everywhere; No Child Left Behind treats every school the same regardless of demographics or contextual circumstances, tax cuts are always and forever good regardless of whether we need the money to provide basic services and marriage is between a man and a woman, never mind that we're in a country built on equality.
Nuance is not a vice. So rarely are fist-pounding declarations correct, or even close to correct. Both on the left and the right, ideological positions must be tempered by the forces of subtlety. It is entirely in our self-interest to do so; not only does a moderated (not a euphemism for watered-down) worldview help close the divisions in America, but it also helps close the divisions between America and the global community.
Moreover, the best policies have usually been complex ones. Social security is an incredibly knotty issue, but it was born of compromise and a setting aside of unwavering ideology.
Ultimately, the American public is the main reason our politicians continue to be afflicted with "and that's just the way it is"-itis. If we demanded more of our candidates than a cheap dig or a sound bite, chances are they would respond. While certain politicians are truly locked into their sadly monochrome outlook, many others would be thrilled to have an intellectual, educated discourse. Unfortunately, the last presidential candidate who veered away from the idea of simplicity is sitting at home fiddling with his lockbox.
We need a culture of complexity, and that's just the way it is.
Elliot Haspel is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at ehaspel@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
