The Left/Right Asymmetry in Ascribing Motives

Dennis Prager--rapidly becoming my favorite radio host--frequently makes a generalization that's nonetheless illuminating.

Prager observes that while those on the right think leftists are naive and misguided in how they attempt to apply their convictions, most of their underlying motives and intentions are good. By contrast, the left tends to think that conservatives' convictions stem directly from malign motives. In other words: we think they're incorrect; they think we're evil.

They want clean air and water, peace, prosperity, tolerance and freedom (to name just a few core ideals). And I believe them. It's just that I think they're going about getting those things in the wrong ways, while overlooking some important applications of those principles. I want those things too. They don't believe me.

One can immediately come up with several exceptions but--being exceptions--they operate at the margins, tending to reinforce the truth of the more general rule. (Sure I occasionally joke about Hillary Clinton being the she-devil, but mostly she's just an ambitious opportunist filled with populist ideas that probably won't work very well and will likely cause harm on the way.)

Were this merely Dennis Prager's idea, I would not be writing about it. But having been far to the left until I was in my early 30's, I can attest to this phenomenon firsthand. Long, long ago (25 years to be precise), I sent rotting chicken parts to the Republican National Committee in a business reply envelope. I know I was not alone in the sentiment behind that utterly juvenile act (deep fear and hatred of a Republican president). I would be in the mainstream with it today.

It's hard to have a calm, rational debate when that is the implicit (sometimes explicit) starting point. How does one answer the underlying charge without going on the defensive and obliquely confirming the suspicion? It is much like the old trap question: "So... how long have you been beating your wife?"

Just to be fair here, it's worth noting that the left learned this technique from a man (a loose cannon, really) of the far far right: Joseph McCarthy. The comparison only illustrates how much notions of "liberal" and "conservative" have flipped in half a century. (The other classic example is the numerous parallels between JFK and George Bush. But that's a story for another day.)

Coming back to the present, most on the left and the right could agree for example, that the killing of a human being is generally to be avoided (i.e., "a bad thing"). Yet the asymmetry makes it difficult to build on that obvious common ground. Why? Because on a deeper level, most on the left simply do not credit those of us on the right with sincerity on the original plank.

This asymmetry prevents true left-right debates from ever getting traction on the tougher applications of any shared principle. E.g., in the previous example, when life begins, whether the state has a right to take life as punishment (or retribution), whether distinctions are to be made between innocents and those bent on violence, whether there is a distinction between killing and murder, under what circumstances it may be moral to kill some in order to save others, etc.

It becomes impossible to move further not primarily because of the issues themselves, but because the left's primary tactic of late is to demonize rather than discuss. George Bush is equivalent to Adolf Hitler. We're only at war because of greed for oil. No sane comparisons or alternative motives are allowed. We are evil. Thus we are not eligible to debate.

What kicked off this thread was a bumper sticker I saw the other day that (I later learned) has been around for awhile. It reads: "Republicans for Voldemort"--as if half the population were animated by pure evil and the 24/7 job of the other half (resounding good 100% of the time) is to completely eliminate that dark and nefarious force.

How do you even begin a debate when that is someone's starting position? Examples here and here. Original cartoon that sparked the bumper sticker idea is here. Just one of many sanctimonious endorsements of the idea here.