"Polarization - Political Theater?"

 

 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Polarization – Political Theater?”

June 14, 2026

 

“Let me now take a more comprehensive view and warn you in the

most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party,

generally...of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge.”

                                                                             George Washington (1732-1799)

                                                                             Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

 

In his 1983 book Modern Times, Paul Johnson wrote that Otto von Bismarck, who led the unification of Germany in the 1870s, was, like George Washington, concerned about the negative influences of political parties – that they would prove divisive, that it would mean that political parties would never produce “...a leader who appealed beyond the narrow limits of his own following.”

 

But has that been the case in the United States? Republican President Ronald Reagan worked closely with Democrat Speaker of the House Thomas “Tip” O’Neill, and Democrat President Bill Clinton was able to find common ground with Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Despite the partisanship that has spread so widely and dug so deeply into our politics today, would having a dozen political parties better serve our 174 million registered voters? And would a consensus be found to govern Congress with multiple parties represented? Politics is not about finding perfection, but about getting the most of what one wants. As President Reagan once said: “Politics is the art of the possible.” 

 

It is not uncommon to believe we live through the worst of times. Yet we get up every day, go to work or school, and life goes on. When one looks back at our history and compares our lives today with that of those who lived earlier, the vast majority live well. While we complain, most of us are happily resigned to the government we have. Of course, whether it is the mercurial President Trump, the cognitively-challenged President Biden, or the ethically-challenged Ken Paxton in Texas or Graham Platner in Maine, we don’t always elevate the most desirable candidates. But we never have. Thieves, scoundrels, racists, misogynists and homophobes have sat in Congress, representing both parties. Yet, despite these challenges the United States has progressed, demonstrating that the wisdom of the Founders was far greater than the inanities offered by TV commentators, or “influencers,” especially as it is possible for any nut to use the bullhorn of social media to promote any cause no matter how extreme. A government “of the people” is superior to a government of “elites.”

 

Nevertheless, polarization is real. Egged on by social media, we see our neighbors as either “Woke” or “MAGA” – we believe the center as gone. Yet, a Washington Post survey in January found that 86% of the population does not fall into the category of “extreme right” or “extreme left.” Politicians in Washington and in many state capitals and large cities put party interests above what is good or right for the country. And the media feeds the partisan divide. For example, TV news is either anti-Trump or adoring of him. 

 

But, while these blowhards appeal to a small – albeit noisy – percentage of the population, the typical voter appears more settled. According to Gallup, over the past fifty years, Independents have been increasing their share of registered voters, from 28% in 1977 to 45% today, reflecting dissatisfaction with the two parties. That number, in my opinion, would be higher if states like Connecticut and fifteen others, allowed registered Independents to participate in either Congressional or Presidential primaries.

 

In 2016 Paul Taylor and Pew Research Center published a book, The Next America. In it, Mr. Taylor wrote: “There’s no evidence from decades of Pew Research surveys that public opinion, in the aggregate, is more extreme than in the past.” Certainly, sectional partisanship was far more extreme in 1860, and even in the late 19^th Century when “free silver” advocates battled monied easterners, and during the Civil Rights and Vietnam War era. Partisanship certainly exists today, but among the bulk of American voters it seems limited to extremists. Nevertheless, in the interest of party unity – of maintaining or taking control of Congress, many “mainstream” politicians ignore the frailties of their party’s candidates – to win at any cost. 

 

Like many Americans, over the past sixty-four years, I have been a Democrat, a Republican and an Independent. While I like to think I have always been guided by a north star of conservative principles, favoring limited government, free markets, rule of law and individual freedom, in my youth – heavy on idealism and light on common sense – I was a Democrat. I felt that government should play a bigger hand in promoting equality of outcomes and dispensing social justice. While I am now registered as a Republican, I would prefer to be Unaffiliated, but registering as such would deny me participating in primaries.

 

Simply put, the most significant difference between the two parties is that Republicans favor smaller government and Democrats prefer larger government. But there are gradations, both in the beliefs of voters and in the policies preferred by politicians, which is why the willingness to compromise is important. 

 

I don’t pretend to have an answer to this pressing problem of polarization. Sadly, it is more than simply political theater. Identity politics has worsened the situation. But a good education would help – familiarity with the history of our country, in contrast to that of other nations; knowledge of different political systems, from monarchies and fascism to socialism and communism; and a basic understanding of economics, including comparisons of Karl Marx and Adam Smith. In the absence of a better educated electorate, I fear that political partisanship – pervasive among the political and media classes – will spread, leading to worsening times. 

 

......................................................................................................

 

What is a problem, but one ignored by politicians on both ends of the political spectrum (and a subject for another day), is the looming debt crisis.

"History Mattters" by David McCullough - A Review

 As an historian, David McCullough would be certain to remember that this day is the 82^ndanniversary of D-Day. On that morning, while all hoped for success, no one involved could know the outcome. Fifty thousand highly trained German troops manned defensive positions, overlooking the beaches at Normandy. Approximately 155,000 allied soldiers, including airborne troops, landed in France that day. A little over 4,000 were killed and about 6,000 were wounded.

 

From the perspective of time, we know what a success the operation was, but of course none of the men involved could see the future. What we now know is that we – the West and all those alive then and born since – are the beneficiaries of the courage and skill of those men. We cannot know the fear those soldiers and sailors felt, but we should appreciate the principles for which they sacrificed so much. Our debt of gratitude can never be fully re-paid, but we should never forget what they did on the beaches and fields in northern France that June day, eighty-two years ago.   

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Burrowing into Books

History Matters, David McCullough

June 6, 2026

 

“The marvelous thing about the past is whenever

you reach down into it, all you find is life.”

                                                                                                                David McCullough

                                                                                                                Address, National Preservation Conference

                                                                                                                San Francisco, 1991

 

David McCullough, a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Price and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, died at 89 in 2022. Even in death we are recipients of his wisdom. His daughter Dorie McCullough Lawson and his researcher Michael Hill gathered a selection of unpublished essays, speeches, tributes and interviews. History Matters is for those with a love for history and an appetite for learning. 

 

The book is short (168 pages) and divided into four parts. David McCullough was a polymath; he has offered us a potpourri, ranging from history and books to writing, art and literature. A few samples:

 

In an address to the National Trust for Historic Preservation in 1991, he said: “...but what I really think draws us to history, the pull of the past, is change. It is what is new, not what is old. And change is the essence of life.” In a 1995 talk at the Library of Congress: “The characters in Herman Wouk’s The Winds of War and War and Remembrance are real because they are in our hearts.” And at Dartmouth College in 2012, he told the audience: “Write to make music. Don’t just pound out notes.” In 1985, Mr. McCullough hosted a documentary on the artist Thomas Eakins, for which he wrote an essay: “Eakins...was painting not for the moment, or even for his own generation...He saw his paintings as an enduring historical record.” At the National Book Festival in 2002, he mentioned a number of his favorite books: A Death in the Family by James Agee, My Antonia by Willa Cather, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith, Two Years Before the Mast, by Richard Henry Dana, and Great Expectations by Charles Dickens. It is a list that most of us would gain from reading, or re-reading.

 

While readers of McCullough are accustomed to his histories of the Panama Canal, the building of the Brooklyn Bridge, the Johnstown Flood and biographies of John Adams, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman, readers of this book are presented with a collection of short essays, including synopses on George Washington, Harriet Beecher Stowe and Paul Horgan.

 

The Pulitzer Prize winning author and historian Jon Meacham wrote the foreword. He cites McCullough’s belief that history is “a story, an unfolding drama in which the men and women of a given moment could not know how everything turned out – whether the waters would recede, or whether the plane would fly, or whether the battle would be won.” It is that sense of almost childish wonder that permeates David McCullough’s published works, and which fills us with joy in this collection.

"Theo of Golden," Allen Levi

There are many things in life that stretch the imagination – what a poet, composer, artist can create, but also what scientists can learn and understand – how both are not bounded by constraints.

 In the May 9-10 edition of The Wall Street Journal there was a short article by Aylin Woodward, “Scientists Figured Out How Fast the Universe is Expanding.” They concluded that objects recede faster as they become more distant: “For instance, a galaxy 3 million light-years away will move away from us by 46 miles per second.” A galaxy twice that distance would be expanding at twice the rate. On the other hand – and this is where their calculations boggle a mind as simple as mine when trying to conceive the size of the universe: “If you took an empty space the size of a football field, and it was expanding at the rate our universe is, it would take more than a million years to expand by a single centimeter.” 

 

Questions abound. The universe is so large, and what does it expand into? And what else is out there, if anything? Allen Levi’s book served to remind me as to what’s important in our lives – our families and friends, the beauty of nature and the world around us, the importance of religion and the mystery of what we cannot know, the magic of human kindness and its connection to art.

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Burrowing into Books

Theo of Golden, Allen Levi

May 17, 2026

 

“It might not make a lot of sense, but for anything

to be good, truly good, there must be love in it.”

                                                                                    Theo speaking to Archer Glissen

 

This is a special book that defies reviewing. Nevertheless, reading it, I thought of the Biblical words from Luke, which represent spiritual redemption and joy: “...he was lost and is found.” As one reads the first page, one is mystified. By the time the last page is turned, one’s belief in miracles is assured.

 

What we learn is that the 86-year-old Theo (he goes by the single name) has arrived in the fictional college town of Golden, an hour or so south of Atlanta, where he flew in by private jet. A Portuguese by birth, he has lived in places like Madrid, Rome, Paris, Rio de Janeiro and, for the past twenty years, New York City.

 

Golden is situated on the Oxbow River, perhaps the Ocmulgee?, a river noted for its oxbows, a river that runs to the sea. It reminds him of the Duoro in northern Portugal, the river on which he grew up. Now, here in Golden, he knows no one – “Well...perhaps one.”

 

And no one in Golden knows him. “He was a Houdini at evading personal questions and answering only those that were within certain unstated boundaries.” Nevertheless, early on he is recognized as an exceptional and good man. James Ponder, an attorney from whom he rents an apartment, says to him: “People like you renew my faith in humanity.”

 

This is a story of art and humanity, of beauty and love, of sadness and happiness. In the Chalice, a barista run by Shep and Addie, Theo notes the 92 pencil-lined portraits that line the walls, all drawn by a local artist, Asher Glissen. Looking at them, Theo discerns something of the character of each individual that the artist has captured. He purchases them and bestows them as a gift to each subject. Thus, we are introduced to myriad characters, among them: the homeless Ellen, the bookseller Tony, Simone the cello player, Minette, niece of Asher, and Kendrick Whitaker, a night janitor at the college and his 8-year-old daughter Lanisha, injured in a car accident. 

 

The story includes surprises, some of which the reader will anticipate, but more they will not.