“Tolerance implies no lack of commitment to one’s own beliefs. Rather it condemns the oppression or persecution of others.” – John F. Kennedy
Kennedy made these comments roughly 50 years ago at a time when the lack of tolerance was manifested in fire hoses turned on protestors. It took the form of attack dogs snarling and biting at people marching to claim rights already granted them but denied them by those in power.
In 2012, intolerance and division are subtle, less overt. It is a verbal assault spoken in code in ideas like culture wars, family values, a war on women or a war on religion. Causes are ways of claiming a moral high ground that one side’s presence atop prevents others who disagree from ever ascending. Our discourse is about absolutes, exceptionalism and allowing no shades of grey.
All sides hold up the Constitution, a document interpreted by intelligent people who study it in so many different ways. The Constitution and Bill of Rights, the basis of our government and freedoms, were written over two centuries ago and each provision’s intent isn’t always clear.
In his first inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln spoke of this vagueness as it related to the issues of his day.
No foresight can anticipate nor any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by State authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say.
From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities.
It comes down to people on both sides working for and reaching compromise. But that is a tough sell in today’s world. In the New York Times this week, former First Lady Barbara Bush said, “I hate that people think compromise is a dirty word. It’s not a dirty word.”
In a world where leadership is often following a pattern of groupthink, compromise with others unlike ourselves is seen as selling out, as compromising one’s values. We huddle among those who see things the way we see them, expressing opinions to each other for affirmation. But if we only have people around us who agree with us, what will we ever learn?
Compromise on the political stage is now seen as weakness, as lacking “bold leadership”. Sides dig in for all or nothing outcomes, sacrificing what is good for our country in the pursuit of what is perfect as defined by our narrow set of interests.
When compromise is reached, the media and society are then “compelled” to pick the winners and losers. That creates hesitation on the part of people in power. In that respect, Barbara Bush’s idea of dirty compromise is exactly right.
But she knows differently, seeing up close President Reagan and President George H. W. Bush working with Democrats to get legislation passed. President Bill Clinton worked with a Republican Congress to get things done. President Abraham Lincoln was one of the great compromisers ever to reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and he is widely regarded as the greatest President in our history.
But a change in tone has come quickly to this country. On Jan. 8, 2002, Republican President George W. Bush signed The No Child Left Behind Act. To the President’s left stood Republican Congressman and co-author of the bill in the House, John Boehner. To the President’s right stood Democratic Senator and co-author of the bill in the Senate, Ted Kennedy.
That was only 10 years ago.
Whether or not you are a fan of the law, it is hard to imagine that scene playing out again on any legislation. To their credit, President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner talked at length about a budget deal to reduce the deficit. Both were willing to compromise on key points.
However, as details began to leak out leaders on both sides began to talk about ideas that were “non-starters.” Lines were drawn in the sand, and a chance to reach across the aisle and work together was lost.
As we continue to slog through an election year, the idea of compromise and working together will certainly be shelved. That is unfortunate because any problems we face in this country do not take a hiatus and do not go away because it is an election year.
In some societies national decisions are dictated by totalitarian governments, but in America we must work together in a democracy. Benjamin Franklin said in the early days of revolution, “We must hang together or assuredly we will all hang separately.”
In an increasingly competitive world we would do well to realize that we must hang together to face the challenges that may come at us from within and from almost anywhere on this planet. If we do not, the consequences for us and for our children will be what haunts us.
