Joyless debate

Who would think that Biden would turn out to be such a incoherent president?

Divisive politics in America, nurtured and exacerbated during the Obama administration and maintained and manifested by the media under Donald Trump, had pretty much eliminated civil discourse in the political and public arena.

No longer do people argue about policies. Instead they argue about personalities. No longer do the marginalized look to reform; instead, they look to protest and violence as a way of construction. No longer do people with a 'bone to pick' provide solutions; instead they just offer criticism. There is no such thing as a constructive alternative anymore; instead, the argument seems to begin and end with grievance, or 'what's wrong,' not how to make things right. No longer can people identify themselves as proud Americans, as one of the 'silent majority;' instead, they are expected to defer to self-identified victims. No longer are there 'interstate's groups;' instead, there is only the pervasive idea of identity politics and intersectionality.

My liberal friend today seem to being and conclude their position with a simple concept -- Donald Trump is evil personified, full stop, end of discussion. Rather than discuss a platform, a policy or a decision, they prefer to run on about Trump's personal behavior. As I recall Joe Epstein saying that while he liked what Obama said, Epstein liked little or nothing of what Obama did. As to Trump, Epstein does not like Trump's style, words or tweets, but he likes what Trump has done to right the country in fashion that makes everyone better off rather than by wanting to lift some by dragging others down. This pits the well-proven across-the-board growth and general prosperity approach with the repeatedly disproven zero-sum, fixed pie argument. As even a leftie like Bono noted, his Irish (and Democrat) culture suggests that one day he will 'get' the rich guy on the hill and take his house and wealth, while the American culture has been that someday you will be able to afford that house and accumulate your own wealth rather than take someone else's.

This also reminds me of an excerpt from a novel I otherwise loved, where the protagonist admired how his teacher summarized capitalism as, 'for one person to win, another person must lose.' Again, is patently false, but it is the rhetoric of the left that students get in many classrooms.

The last Dem vice presidential Tim Kaine candidate claimed that American didn't inherit slavery; we invented it. Again, another demonstrable lie, but one that earns the ear of the angry mobs.

Hillary Clinto at the recent DNC convention, opined that Trump 'stole' the election fro her, because she won the popular vote by three million votes. Just as her husband earned the presidency without capturing a majority of the votes, Trump won based on the electoral college. So now she wants to eliminate the electoral college.

The litany of bad policies, fake assertions, and hate speech directed towards Trump and, in many cases, for the 'deplorable' that Hillary also hates, makes the case for any Democrat platform or candidate hard to swallow. Cap that off with a Black Lives Matters stance that is anti-family, anti-Catholic, anti-police, and anti-capitalist, it is hard to understand how any fair-minded person -- red or blue state -- could justify a vote that is primarily an anti-Trump vote rather than a constructive e peace argument.

As I told my students, anyone can complain. Anyone can have an opinion. What we need instead, are solutions, based upon a logical, fact-based, evidenced argument, not rhetoric, cliches, or tropes. Anyone can find things wrong; few have a plan to make things right.

And one final note: Its probably best to ignore 'arguments' that call for more free stuff, be it healthcare, higher education, cell phones, housing, food or concerts. If you think things are expensive now, with until they are 'free' but only open to some people, or run by the government, or that are paid by someone else. When a politician claims that the government is going to provide anything for free, the implication is that there is no cost. Often the cost is higher than the previous price. Just look at college PELL grants: Provide grants for tuition, only for the colleges to increased their price greater or equal to the size of the grant.