Thoughts on Debate

Posted on October 18, 2004 in Citizenship Journalists & Pundits Thinking

There is no national debate going on. There is John Kerry stating positions and programs. There is George W. Bush mocking those positions and programs, trying to stampede us into a panic. Debate sets concepts and evidence side by side. It calls for analysis, testing of the data by the facts. It is not ideological by nature. It is not now nor has it ever been a gladiatorial pit as the media makes it out to be. Its discussions are public not so the sides can win converts but so we who watch can enjoy the advantages of this intellectual exercise.

The media and sometimes we bloggers fail to realize this. Debate is not about oppositions as it is about a unity, an agreement to compare the facts and weigh the strength of the arguments by their ability to explain the facts. Debate happens in science and, when the media gets out of the way, in politics. It does not bring up style or aesthetics. It knows the difference between valid social concerns and the lunatic fringe. In real debate, the participants grant the audience its intelligence.

We don’t have to give the Lunatic Fringe a hearing. This has been our problem. We think we have to listen to everyone. Constitutionally, we have to allow them the same freedom as everyone else, but intellectually it is best to ignore them so that we can get to work on the effects of our policies and our lifestyles on our environment, our duty to choose, and our community. The moment we see wild theories and glamour shows taking flight from the mouth of a pundit, it is time to just turn our television off.

John Kerry talks about the real problems we face as human beings. This is why so many ambassadors, the New York Times, and a growing number of others have endorsed him. I look forward to debating him after four years of incessant propaganda.