"Who is the Extremist?"
Sydney M.
Williams
Thought of the Day
“Who is the Extremist?”
January 27, 2013
We
live in a in a pluralistic country. New
York State ,
with a population of about 19.6 million people encompasses people from across
the political, economic, social and religious spectrums. Governor Cuomo acted
like an elitist and nativist when he said that “extreme conservatives who are
right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay…have no place in the state of New York , because that’s
not who New Yorkers are.” He may be Governor, but does that give him the right
to say who New Yorkers are? No matter where one stands on those issues, the Governor’s
declaration was extreme. When Mayor de Blasio provided support: “He was
absolutely right to say what he said,” it meant that he agreed that
intolerance, when expressed by Mr. Cuomo, is perfectly okay.
One
is reminded of Senator Barry Goldwater’s famous admonition: “Extremism in the
defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no
virtue.” Certainly Governor Cuomo was not defending liberty. He was doing the
opposite. Those words of Mr. Goldwater might be amended: ‘While tolerance of
intolerance is no virtue, intolerance toward those with whom one disagrees is a
vice.’ That lack of tolerance is especially meaningful when it is expressed by public
servants. New York City
is a polyglot city in a polyglot state and nation. Our leaders, who are elected
based on their stands on issues, are expected to represent all the people. They
should seek unity, not promote division.
Here
is my personal take on the three “extreme” conservative positions Mr. Cuomo
finds so offensive. On the first, I have mixed feelings. I very much support the
right of a woman to have control over her own body, but at the same time it
seems inescapable to me, from a scientific perspective, to suggest that life begins
at any time other than at conception. If not then, when? Abortion is a serious
matter. A few years ago, the idea was that abortion should be “rare, safe and
legal.” That seems a sensible balance. In terms of assault weapons, I have no
personal interest in weapons. (In truth, I do own an old flintlock that I
bought 45 years ago for $75.00) The last time I fired a weapon was in the army,
fifty-two years ago. But I appreciate the importance and relevance of the Second
Amendment and I recognize that many enjoy the sport of hunting. Tight gun
controls in cities like Chicago and Detroit have not prevented
shootings. While we may disagree on the subject, I see no reason to impose my
values on them…and no reason for gun advocates to impose theirs on me. We should
be able to live harmoniously. I am not sure what is meant by anti-gay.
Prejudice, without reason, is immoral and against the values I have tried to
instill in our children, but if the meaning is meant to disparage traditional
families, I believe they are wrong. Research supports the idea that children
brought up in families with a mother and father have better chances of success.
While a two-parent household is not always possible, it should be the goal, and
certainly should not be disparaged.
What
I don’t like is intolerance, whether it is uttered by radical Islamists or by
people like Andrew Cuomo, Bill de Blasio or Rush Limbaugh. Mr. Cuomo may claim that
right-to-lifers, gun advocates, or anti-gays are intolerant. Some of them are,
but so are many on the contra side of these issues. Imitating them, in terms of
expressing extreme views as did Mr. Cuomo, does little to further civil debate.
There is enough intolerance in the world as it is. The last thing we need is a
political leader driving the wedge deeper into the chasm that divides us.
Accusations
of extremism, which have been largely responsible for the division that divides
us, have become more acute under Mr. Obama. On October 31, 2008, he declared,
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming America .” Why would he say that?
Some might excuse it as simply campaign rhetoric in the last days of a
Presidential campaign. Perhaps that is so. But it disturbed me at the time and
still bothers me today. While we have flaws, we have been the most liberal and
tolerant nation in history. Political leaders should ensure that does not
change. We can always become better. But there is, and there never has been,
any country as welcoming to peoples from all over the world, nor as free, as
ours. If Mr. Obama had said he wanted to improve on what we have, I could have
accepted that, but that is not what he said.
There
is an asymmetry between declamations of those on the far Left and those on the
far Right, which is disturbing. The former often express a visceral hostility,
which is intended to marginalize their opposition in the style of Saul Alinsky.
One only has to recall the demonization of Sarah Palin in 2008 or the
vilification of Mike Huckabee last week – in both cases taking words out of
context and relentlessly belittling them. Likewise, Bush lied; Obama tells
falsehoods. Lies and false statements are too often ignored by mainstream media
when they are uttered by those on the Left. Lies about Benghazi and the IRS are examples. Elizabeth
Warren’s lie about her heritage was another. So was Wendy Davis’s lie about
bringing up her children as a single mother. Conservatives would have been
scalded for making such false claims.
We
are truly, as I wrote above, a polyglot nation. People have emigrated to these
shores from virtually every nation on earth. We are more racially and
ethnically diverse than any other nation. Intermarriage between races, ethnics
and creeds has made us a unique people, unlike any other nation. A hundred or
two hundred years from now the genetic differences between us will be even less.
From the start, the United
States was unique in its outreach to people
from all lands. E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one) was the motto recommended by
the committee Congress appointed on July 4, 1776 to design the Great Seal of
the new United States .
The founding fathers provided an explicit plan for government. But implicit, in
what they said, wrote and did, was a moral code, or a sense of values, if you
will. Over time that moral code has changed, reflecting input from new
immigrants. However, many of the lessons taught by the founding fathers have as
much relevance today as they did 238 years ago – our essential rights embedded
in the Bill of Rights; checks and balances, inherent in the Constitution;
property rights; the rule of law; the emphasis on the individual; the
separation of church and state, but with an emphasis on the importance of
religion and God. An American culture should keep what is best from our past
and gradually improve it by adding what is best from other cultures. Tolerance
and respect for those of differing opinions are near the top of those lists.
The
concept of fundamentally transforming a people and a nation is extreme.
Standing up and speaking out for ideas in which one believes is a right
provided from our founding. It is not extreme. What makes someone an extremist
is not so much their beliefs; it is the adamancy with which they proclaim them
and the total disregard they have for those of differing opinions. Extremism can
be seen in the deprecation of elites toward their political opponents, and their
inability to engage in debate. It was Governor Cuomo who was the extremist; it
was not the conservatives who offer differing opinions.
Labels: TOTD
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home