An Inconvenient Ideology

When I began this blog, I recall making some kind of silent pact with myself that I would never blog about anything too overtly personal. This blog would remain a political blog; it would remain in the abstract.

The problem with this approach, of course, is that politics is inherently personal -- if done correctly, in my opinion. Perhaps it's different if you are running for office - one must retain a certain sense of dispassionate engagement to succeed, I believe - but with researching and commenting from afar as I do, I can't help but to Make It Personal. Despite my attempts (with a modicum of success), I doubt I have the capacity to disconnect myself entirely from my beliefs for the sake of debate. For this reason, I would make a terrible politician.

But does this also make me a terrible son/brother/uncle?

This is Thanksgiving weekend, and that means family-time. I'm thankful for my family and I love them dearly. They have been an enormous influence on who I am and what I believe...and I say that with no hint of irony, despite that we could not be further apart on the political spectrum.

But this weekend was a test of my loyalties, I must admit. Through the years, we have learned to minimize political discussion, since it usually devolves into politely ambiguous, poignancy-free (and therefore unsatisfying) discussion at best, or uncomfortable silence at worst.

This weekend was no exception, and I offer only one, simple anecdote as it's all I can muster to replay. All you need to know for this example are three factors: (a) Everyone knows I am a liberal; (b) We are all equally aware that politics is a lightning rod; (c) As a consequence of (a) and (b), we usually connect on neutral topics - e.g., work, travel, house remodeling, movies.

Me: I recently purchased a copy of "An Inconvenient Truth"...not sure if you've seen it. I meant to bring it up this weekend so we could watch it.

Mom's Husband: Ah. I haven't seen it. It's not something that would normally interest me.

Me: Really? I thought you might like it. It's a well-made documentary.

Mom's Husband: Uh...no.

[Cue topic change]

OK. Loaded topic. Loaded suggestion. Perhaps I should have avoided it. But I felt we may have had some common ground here, since I've heard comments from him in support of environmental stewardship, and we commonly rent/watch quality documentaries. In fact, when I purchased my copy of Fahrenheit 9/11 years ago, I specifically did not make a similar suggestion because I knew how Michael Moore is perceived by those on the right.

But what could be their problem with the former Vice President and Senator from Tennessee? My family is from Oklahoma; I figured there might be at least a sense of southern kinship or something.

Alas, no. Nothing.

What could be their problem with this documentary, then? This is not a propaganda film, as some on their side would have us believe; climatologists have universally praised it for its accuracy. In an effort to understand the resistance, I have compiled a list of possible explanations:

1. They believe climate change is not an issue; this is not a crisis.
2. Al Gore is a Democrat.
3. Al Gore is an educated progressive, and as such acts like a know-it-all.
4. Al Gore is using this issue as a wedge, to frighten voters into believing there is a crisis so they will vote Democrats back into power, who will then use this issue an an excuse to further regulate industry.

My operating assumption is that the science of climate change is not in question by members of my family, so explanation #1 is off the table. If my assumption is wrong, then I'm worse off than I thought. If the case, then I fear that there is no hope of familial reconciliation: We might as well resign ourselves to talking about the weather at all future family functions. No amount of discussion will bridge that political and intellectual chasm.

So, I assume that they do not agree with their fellow Oklahoman, Senator James Inhofe, and that they do agree that man-made pollution is causing a global crisis. If this is the case, perhaps they simply don't need to hear Al Gore, the Democrat, lecturing them about global warming. Maybe they feel they understand the issue well enough without his didacticism, since some of their own (such as John McCain) also believe this is a crisis that our federal government needs to address. If so, I understand. Items #2 and #3 are therefore explained. Let's move on.

If #4 is correct, this might also make sense, since a common conservative trait is to project, and employing wedge issues to achieve political gain is certainly a well-tested tactic used by their side (never mind that Republican wedge issues are typically red-herrings (see: gay marriage, abortion), and climate change is no red-herring). They would be right to reject this tactic.

But even if Al is using this issue for crass political gain (despite his credible insistence to the contrary), what does this imply about my family? Does this mean that if they understand that our climate is in crisis, that Republicans will take care of it (and Democrats should be ignored)? If so, on what evidence do they rely to believe that Republicans will indeed do something about it? John McCain's word? What about Congressional and Executive inaction on this issue since Republicans have been in power?

Or is it that they truly believe that support for Al Gore equates to support for further government regulation? While opposing this certainly aligns with their political ideology as I understand it, what do they then propose to do to address this crisis? If not further regulation, then what?

I understand that all of this may simply be conjecture. Maybe this simply means I need to force myself to have these discussions openly with family members, rather than debate my assumptions on a public blog. But in my defense, I believe I have tried, and I believe that it's a difficult conversation to have when one side simply wishes to compartmentalize and over-simplify complex issues, rather than wade through an informed debate that may bring up some inconvenient truths - truths that might rattle an otherwise untested belief system.

If I seem strident, it's mostly because I consider my family's thinking to be a microcosm of the thinking that gets us into situations like the one facing us today in Iraq. Best intentions do not necessarily lead to best policy practices; blind trust in authority and your ideology is not infallible. Careful consideration of policy and an understanding of consequences are required.

I realize the inconvenience, but, please, let's put blind ideology aside for all of our sakes. If faced with a similar situation, I believe I would.

In short, let's just watch the damn movie...you might just learn something.