A ray of hope from the grassroots
Infidel753, A ray of hope from the grassroots, Infidel753 Blog
Mid-December commentary by Infidel753 as taken from his site as known by the same title.
Much of the intensity of political polarization in the US comes from a strangely mirror-image-like pair of personal-freedom issues — abortion rights and gun rights. In each case one side, or rather its most militant exponents, is grimly determined to attack and destroy what the other side considers an absolutely vital freedom.
To those who value personal freedom across-the-board, and to much of the “exhausted majority” seeking to overcome the dead-end division of American society into two bitterly-opposed camps, the outlines of a political “grand bargain” seem obvious. Let the right wing permanently and sincerely renounce its attacks on abortion rights, and let the left wing permanently and sincerely renounce its attacks on gun rights, and much of the intractability of our current divisions would start to ease. Tens of millions on each side who now feel they must vote against the opposing side’s party to preserve an essential freedom, no matter what their misgivings about some of their own party’s extremist positions, would feel their options broaden. Each party would gain a chance to be competitive in areas of the country from which it is now locked out. Democracy itself would benefit.
In reality, of course, this seems impossible, because the zealots on each side will never stop crusading against the freedom so valued by the other. They will always hold their own side’s party, and the majority of the population which might be more amenable to live-and-let-live, hostage to their determination to force everyone into conformity with their own taboos and visceral dislikes.
But two recent developments may give cause for hope.
The first, of course, is the wave of victories for abortion rights in referenda and elections across the country since Dobbs. It’s striking that these have occurred even in red states such as Kansas and Ohio, and with unusually high voter turnout — which indicates that many Republican voters now support personal freedom on this issue. Most recently, in Florida, at least 150,000 Republicans (mainly women, apparently) signed on to support putting a measure protecting abortion rights on next year’s ballot. It’s clear that Dobbs was the catalyst — back when abortion was constitutionally protected, it was easy to vote for a party committed to banning it if you supported that party on other issues, because you knew that they wouldn’t have the power to actually implement such a ban. Now, with abortion under real threat and a succession of horror stories like this in the news, preserving that freedom suddenly moves to the top of the priority list.
The second development first came to my attention here, though in reality it should have been obvious that this would happen. Over the last few years gun ownership among urban liberals has risen sharply, driven by the explosion of crime in major cities, and in many cases the ineffectiveness of the police in dealing with it or even outright ideology-driven coddling of criminals* by local governments. In my own city of Portland there have been case after case of things like random violent attacks on individuals, whole streets being taken over by street racers, “protesters” harassing innocent bystanders by blocking traffic, retailers abandoning downtown because of unsustainable losses from robbery, employers similarly leaving because their employees don’t feel safe, and on and on. And I’ve seen plenty of other such stories from other big cities. The latest wrinkle is the wave of violence and vandalism and murderous rhetoric directed against Jewish people and sites during the outbreak of open Nazism among “progressives” since the October 7 attack on Israel. More and more people who always felt basically safe no longer do. Red states have traditionally had higher crime rates than blue cities, which is part of why the residents of the former felt the need to be armed — but the same is becoming true of the cities.
Just as many Republican voters have become less willing to support abortion bans in the abstract when there is suddenly a real threat of such a ban actually taking effect, so many urban liberals find the ability to physically defend themselves a lot more vital when violence and chaos are escalating where they live.
As I noted above, the zealots of the right and left will never renounce their attacks on abortion rights and gun rights respectively. But it seems the grassroots are rebelling against their intransigence. If this can be sustained, with red-state abortion restrictions and blue-state gun restrictions dismantled by the voters themselves via referenda and protest campaigns, then the exhausted majority will finally have scored a win, sweeping the ideologists aside and perhaps opening the way for further steps toward a less polarized, more tolerant, freer future.
[*Another infuriatingly-coddled criminal is of course Donald Trump, who in a sane world would already have been tried, convicted, and executed for inciting an insurrection and trying to violently overturn an election result. But that’s really a matter for another post.]
well, i always like a plea for reason and compromise followed by a call to execute the leader of the opposition.
I have proposed some actual compromises that could be made by both sides which i think have a chance of reaching the “i could live with that” threshhold, but they attracted as much interest as this post.
This article rests upon a false equivalency.
While the right wing attacks on abortion rights and women’s healthcare are both loudly promoted by the right and having a dramatic impact on people’s lives, the left wing attacks on gun rights are more of a fiction created to round out a nice both-sided article.
The faux GRAND BARGAIN compromise article, where the right does no bargaining and the left caves, always needs a healthy dose of dishonest both-sideisms to set up the con.
Jay1
i probably agree with you on both the abortion and gun issues. But I don’t think your attitude holds much promise of getting anywhere by compromise.
or getting anywhere.
Jay1
“I” will grant you the right to own a bolt action rifle loaded through the breech or a revolver holding up to seven rounds. You do not need a semi-automatic or automatic to go hunting Bambi or Gentle Ben or for protection. Nobody is going to take away your cap gun or BB gun and you can make like Wyatt Earp all you want.
The escalation of spewing bullets due to technological improvements in weaponry does not belong in your hands or anyone else hands. Much is due to pandering to profits and a lust to having the biggest gun in the neighborhood. It is not a right and it is a responsibility. So far many have not shown the level of responsibility to even own a revolver or a bolt action weapon.
The misuse of guns (sigh) is not a fiction, it is a reality. The right to own has been destroyed by the zealots.
I’m not sure y’awl read that the same way I did, maybe if it’s turned around: left wing attacks on gun rights are a false equivalency given the right’s loud, proud and ultimately successful attacks on abortion rights and womens’ healthcare and their dramatic impact on people’s lives. It’s not compromise it’s a cave …
Ten Bears:
Let me think about it. I do not always get things right. Close; but not all the time. I do not see a comp. I do see emotions.
@Ten,
Yes, equating abortion with firearms is a false equivalency. The state has no business blocking a woman’s bodily autonomy. There are zero circumstances in which a woman exercising her right to an abortion harms anyone else. A firearm can be used to kill others. Real conservatives want the nanny state out of womens’ personal decisions. Real conservatives support gun control.
Bill
misses the point that gun nuts are not buying for hunting or home protections. they sincerely believe they may need the guns to stop a tyranny from our own government.
since i believe that tyranny may come from a Trump led government, I am not entirely out of sympathy with the gun nuts. and don’t count them out, they have no illusion about fighting the U.S. Army. they will either have the Army on their side or they will win through small arms and superior tactics. … or so they believe.
and another reader misses the point that to the anti abortion nuts, abortion is murder of a child. you may not agree, it is convenient for you not to agree. but try not to fool yourself into believing that yours is the only “reasonable” position.
and to both of you i need to say that as a matter of “law”…what the law “should” be… i agree with you. but we won’t get there by failing to understand what the other guy is thinking. and somehow tinking we can win just by forcing them to agree with us.
i think we might get further with laws respecting the right of privacy, and emphasizing the “well regulated militia” part of the second amendment. i don’t expet anyone to agree with me based on this one sentence, but i do think the approach would eventually reveal the way.
Supreme Court Poised to Rule on Monday on Trump’s Eligibility to Hold Office
NY Times – 8 hours ago
An unusual announcement from the court provided a strong hint that the justices will act the day before the primaries on Super Tuesday.
hah! speaking of getting somewhere by compromise.
it seems to me the Party can do anything it wants: They can nominate anyone they want, but even if he wins, he will not be allowed to serve.
Infidel is from the more populated side of the Cascades and can be forgiven for sometimes being behind the time. I long ago called attention to how out on the East Side “liberals” and “lefties” have long carried guns. Snakes. And other varmints. Then I stopped
There’s even a gang out east ~ Redneck Liberals …
back east in western oregon they call themselves second amendment liberals.
and let the dogs and cats take care of the snakes and varmints.