Thought Experiment No. 1

Imagine a baseball stadium. Fill it with twenty thousand Americans. Require Democrats to wear blue and Republicans to wear red. At a podium on the second stage, have one person give a speech, for example, about immigration.

Fights soon break out.

Rewind.

The same twenty thousand people. Let them dress however they want. Instead of the talking guy, put two baseball teams in there. Suddenly a different energy emerges. Among Team One’s supporters, there will be both liberals and conservatives who suddenly unite around a common cause. Ditto Team Two. There will be disagreements, of course, but they will tend to be relatively benign as we have been taught the acceptable discourse of the game of baseball.

Discussion Questions:

Regarding the first example:

Who issued the order to wear red or blue?

Who dragged that podium there?

Who chose the topic? So from which list?

Is it possible that “politics” means arguing harshly about a short list of pre-approved topics (immigration, abortion, cancel culture, etc.)? These issues are somehow provided by (let’s say) some distant power. Who also provided a rigid framework for discussing these, a framework designed not to resolve anything but to ensure continued conflict, where agitation is the goal, where agitation is, let’s face it, a big moneymaker?

Thought Experiment No. 2

Sit four Democrats and four Republicans around a charming local conference table somewhere in the heart of the country. (Put one of those golden American maples out the window and let the autumn leaves fall once in a while.) They’re a city council. Their subject is potholes. There are five thousand dollars worth of potholes in town, but the city has only three thousand dollars in its pothole repair budget.

These eight people are trying to solve a specific problem. Which holes can be left unfilled? So which are the biggest? Shouldn’t we be taking care of the one in front of the hospital? These three will have to wait on that road on the outskirts of the city where no one goes.

The discussion is practical, not theoretical. (What is the left view about potholes, or MAGA view?) This problem solvingIt’s something we Americans are good at (or at least think we are). Most people on both sides know a pragmatic solution when they see it, especially if they have been working on the problem and have an idea of ​​the costs, options, and sacrifices required to solve it.

An outcome similar to love may arise between this group of people.

We, the Pit Eight, will emerge from the wars together. We will enjoy teasing together. Ridiculous criticism of our work comes from the poorly informed public. Maybe we can take some pride in what we’ve accomplished. Sometimes I’m driving and I notice a big pothole and I call my friend Murray from city hall, he may be a Republican but I honestly don’t care. I want to tell him about that big hole.

Discussion Questions:

What or who causes us to dislike each other so much?

Could one reason we feel sick right now be that our natural desire to care for each other is thwarted by distant, profit-driven forces?

Thought Experiment No. 3

Imagine you are about to have a political discussion with a close friend or family member. You are on opposite sides of the left-right divide. You’ve had this argument many times before.

Many times.

Discussion Questions:

Sometimes wouldn’t it be easier if you each brought a small television and left it running in the kitchen, tuned to your network, and you could both go out into the garden and talk about something you’ve been thinking about? Do you have some original information? Once you go out and talk like that, wouldn’t it be nice to feel your pre-formed “political” shells disappear? And wouldn’t it be disheartening and alarming if one of you slipped up and said a trigger word or phrase (e.g. “immigrant” or “Trump” or “politically correct” or “eat cats and dogs”)? , are you falling back on your canned “political” jargon, like actors who suddenly realize that the scripts they’ve been given must be honored at all costs?

Who speaks through you in that moment, as the two of you stand there like Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em robots, attacking each other with others’ words, often looking a little sad, even embarrassed?

Thought Experiment No. 4

Imagine a simple, pastoral ancestor of ours walking around with a stick, smelling the flowers.

What allowed this caveman to survive was his ability to form ideas based on mental reflection. This also applies to us.

But we get much more information from it; strange kinds of knowledge, knowledge created far away by powerful people with agendas. It is delivered invisibly in a way that gives us a deep sense of belonging. It’s addictive. Very impressive. It flows unmediated to the brain, in fact the same brain that Mr. Flower Sniffer wanders around in, and just as a stomach designed for nuts and fruit is suddenly faced with TripleFlame Pasta and Lard Burger, that brain begins to experience digestive problems. , but still gives it a good try.

Discussion Questions: