Remonstrance (12)—Reasonable Solutions

A year ago on Round and Square (18 December 2011)—Hurtin' Country: Hello Darlin'
Click here for the introduction to the Round and Square series "Remonstrance"

[a] Beacon RF

This is part of a multi-post series dealing with the Newtown school shootings and American political culture. Click below for other posts in the series:

News 1               News 2               News 3               News 4

Although I am not one to think of Round and Square is an opinion leader, it is clear that "we" are on the same wave length as several influential lawmakers who generally support a wide array of Second Amendment rights. Today's news shows an interesting trickle of remonstrance—the kind I said was lacking—on the "right to keep and bear..." side of the contentious issue(s). Could it be a sign that reasonable people might be able to have serious and thoughtful discussions (and possibly initiate meaningful legislation) around a terribly divisive part of our shared lives?

[b] Bridge RF

Maybe. 

Let me conclude this little series of posts with my own fondest hope for the future of American political culture. Two of my favorite people in the entire world come to mind, and I think that they could work it out.

Really. 

One is a former marine who is an avid deer and moose hunter in northern New England. I have spent exhilarating days with him in an ice house (smelt was our prey), a northern cabin (or "camp") having breakfast lobster with strong coffee, and in long conversations about guns, work, family, and the future. He is an NRA member, and has taught his children and grandchildren the safe use of firearms. I love him like a big brother, and will call him "Jeff."

The other friend is an urban organizer in a large, Midwestern city. He is deeply read (with an abiding commitment to Gertrude Stein), sensitive to the nuances of race, class, and gender, and a fervent opponent of gun violence in his city and beyond. I have spent exhilarating days with him in China discussing cultural nuance (he came to visit on a whim many years ago), doing service work in a small Minnesota town, and talking, over the years, about politics, difference, commitment, and life. He supports serious gun control measures and generally liberal causes. I love him like a little brother, and will call him "Gerard."

[c] Isolated RF

Here's what I want. I want to put Jeff and Gerard in a nice, well-lit, and finely-stocked room where they can talk about gun ownership and safety, urban crime and gun violence, the NRA, the Brady Bill, life, family, politics, and big-and-little brothers. In my musings, this would go on for several days (with nice breaks for maybe a little hunting, on the one hand, and Gertrude Stein reading on the other). It might even continue for a few weeks or months.

In the end, I'll take what my two "brothers" can work out. 

I trust them, and know that they will never sell out their convictions or stop listening to the other side. I am also pretty sure that I am not alone in knowing people who could be committed, reasonable, and reflective all at the same time. I suspect, as well, that most of you reading this could come up with a few people of your own who could negotiate a settlement (even in a daydreaming world of social cohesion). Just do the thought experiment for yourself: imagine reasonable people with a "take" on the world...actually talking to each other. 

And listening, too. 
What a concept.

It sure beats waiting for the next news cycle in our broken political culture. 

This is part of a multi-post series dealing with the Newtown school shootings and American political culture. Click below for other posts in the series:

News 1               News 2               News 3               News 4

[d] Increasing clarity RF

Remonstrance (10)—Still Life, With Conversation

A year ago on Round and Square (16 December 2011)—Fieldnotes From History: Belief
Click here for the introduction to the Round and Square series "Remonstrance"

[a] Round and round RF

This is part of a multi-post series dealing with the Newtown school shootings and American political culture. Click below for other posts in the series:

News 1               News 2               News 3               News 4

One of the most misunderstood things about the concept of remonstrance is the risk, the pain, and the challenge of speaking out when we know that our voices will be misunderstood, attacked, or demeaned. 

You may think that this is a misprint. 

[b] Misap(prehension) RF

How could that be misunderstood (I hear you cry)? Anyone who has ever had to "bite her tongue" or work up the courage to challenge a boss (or professor) knows that the pressure not to do so is enormous. And that is precisely my point. What is misunderstood is that it is (kind of) "risky." No, it is much, much worse than that. It is terribly risky, and there are a dozen rationalizations for backing down for every one to speak out. 

There are so many ways to avoid speaking out that our language is filled with them.

                                         Lose the battle; win the war.
                                         Keep your powder dry.
                                         Keep the peace.
                                         Live to fight another day.
                                         Turn the other cheek.
                                         And so on...

[c] Blocked RF

For the moment, I choose not to focus on the pugilistic tone of many such phrases. That is startling enough, but there is more, and it is troubling. Keeping the peace seems to rank so high(ly) in our social lives that we just go on and on and on in a profoundly dissatisfying kind of still life—never rocking the boat, and never risking our advantage (or relative disadvantage) in electoral politics. 

We still ourselves.

As regular readers know, Round and Square tries very hard not to be "political." It remains so today. Still, sometimes the most political thing we can do is simply to argue for more conversation. Call it political, if you want, but asking for conversation is only political if some people don't want any. 

If that's the case, I'm political.

I call it the very stuff we do on these pages every day. How can we analyze the back-and-forth of Chinese factional politics (and remonstrance) in the eleventh century and turn away from the lack of such engagement here, right before our eyes? Well, I can't. All I am saying is think. Then converse. If it was good enough for Wang Anshi and Sima Guang, it should be good enough for us (not to mention Mayor Bloomberg and Charlton Heston, sort of).

I seek "conversation" not because I am apolitical, but rather because I am absolutely disgusted by the lack of engagement I am seeing on some of the most important cultural and political issues of our time. I study "remonstrance" for a living. Remonstrance is a peculiar kind of "conversation," but it is important. Where is it these days? In the wake of a tragedy of monumental proportion, I am asking a very slightly different question from the ones I have heard in the last few days. I ask only this:

                                        Where is the debate? 
                                        Where is the conversation? 
                                        Where is the remonstrance?

[d] Pockets RF

If you answer "it's everywhere," you have missed my point. I don't mean "today" and I don't mean "in certain pockets of the country." I don't even mean "between the obvious factions." I mean...three weeks ago (and three weeks from now)...and all over the country, in every school, family, and organization—and (this is most important of all) within the "factions." 

A profound tragedy has gotten some of this going again. I am only (at this point) looking for something basic—remonstrance and conversation. A version of this ideal should be obvious to anyone who has read the key documents of American history: let's stop sitting still and jump start the "conversation."

It will be messy. 

All "sides" have opinions. So be it. All I know is that I haven't heard many "sides" between January 2011 and this past Friday. I have not heard much nuance. That's what I mean by "where is the "debate," "conversation," and remonstrance?" I'll have a little more to say about it tomorrow.

In the meantime, could we just pry out a little reflection? Maybe we could move beyond "ban 'em all" versus "...my cold, dead hands"...and actually do some thinking? What a concept.

It sure beats just waiting for the next news cycle in a pathetic, broken, political culture.

This is part of a multi-post series dealing with the Newtown school shootings and American political culture. Click below for other posts in the series:

News 1               News 2               News 3               News 4

[e] Fragmented RF

Displays of Authenticity (20)—Unfathomable

One year ago on Round and Square (15 December 2011)—Fieldnotes From History: Rain
Click here to read the introduction to the Round and Square series "Displays of Authenticity"

Some things are just beyond belief. By definition, our reactions are "authentic." How could they be otherwise when we are in uncharted territory? I have no intention of analyzing—overthinking—these matters today. That is reserved on these pages for more ordinary matters, not this. Everything is just too raw.

I do urge all of us to do some thinking, though. Above all, we should consider how we process these experiences. That's authenticity, not overthinking. I agree with the president's remarks today; we have seen too much of this...and...we have never quite seen anything like it. 

My greatest fear is that we'll get on with life just a little too quickly. 

Again.

I hope not. I hope that we can spend more time than usual thinking about the victims, reflecting on who we are as a nation, and getting serious about what is wrong.

Because something is most definitely wrong.