9 Comments

I love this clear and wise analysis. It needs to be publicized more widely. I recently watched the amazingly well-documented and thorough PBS special about George Wallace and came to the same conclusion. And as Brian Stevenson demonstrates in his amazing work with death row inmates and his Equal Justice Initiative, "Each of us is better than the worst thing we have ever done." (or said, I might add.) We all need to climb down from our "high horse" (as my mother used to call it) and deal with each other person to person, as part of the imperfect human family.

Expand full comment
May 19, 2023·edited May 20, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

A friend of mine had a big problem with a controlling wife who would melt over conflict. She was the epitome of passive-aggressive. She would not talk about their problems. She would not go to counseling. They ended up divorced. She has been divorced again. He is happily married with a second life.

Pushing uncomfortable speech down and out does not fix any problems nor change any minds, it just sends the people to check out and go underground with their views.

Expand full comment
May 20, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

Solid take. One could quibble with the title: once our opponents are known, are they really our enemies? Then again, maybe that’s what the author is implying sotto voce. As a Clinton voter in 2016 I was appalled at how many people I had thought of as tolerant refused to associate or speak with anyone who voted for Trump.

Expand full comment
May 20, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

I commented the other day that liberal principles can't just be defended as abstractions, they need to be brought down to Earth. Angel Eduardo does so brilliantly. Bravo.

Expand full comment
May 19, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

This is just what we needed. Thank you for such a thoughtful and encouraging piece. I agree with others...this ought be distributed widely!

Expand full comment

Because of Substack's variety, I now have the opportunity to reference the Drive-By Truckers, "The Three Great American Icons," which takes on George Wallace's segregationist racism and his late in life efforts at atonement. This song fits with the theme of this post, I think, by dealing with "the duality of that Southern thing."

https://youtu.be/1MIztbe1_e8

Expand full comment
May 21, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

George Wallace's redemption may have been a reversion to his old self. Early in his career, when he was a judge, he was trusted by the black community for his fairness and absence of bigotry. Then that reputation caused him to lose a race for public office to an opponent who used it against him with white voters, and Wallace privately swore that he would never again be outdone in racist appeal.

As for the perils of certitude, one is certainly the "calcification of cognition, ... corrosion of curiosity" that the author mentions. Another, related, one is the artificial floor with which it positively supports pernicious beliefs and attitudes. Once we've become certain about some one great proposition -- that everything is due to God's will, or that all social ills are due to white racism -- we can not only stop pursuing truth but proceed to build an elaborate superstructure of delusion.

http://thefamilyproperty.blogspot.com/2023/02/this-much-is-certain.html

Expand full comment
May 22, 2023Liked by Angel Eduardo

After more than a year, subscribed. You earned it.

Expand full comment
deletedMay 20, 2023·edited May 20, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I've read your essay. You've certainly given the subject of renewing the United States a lot of serious thought. I wish that our politicians dedicated the same level of thought to the debt ceiling, the war in Ukraine, or any of the other critical issues we're facing. After all that reflection, I can sympathize with your frustration at the lack of response.

I suspect that a lot of people find the piece just too big for a response, so they don't respond at all. I know that I do. As it stands, the piece discusses organizational details at great length, but not why these organizations are needed, how they'll meet the undefined need, or how they'll be organized in the first place, since the piece specifically rejects leadership. It seems to assume that this complex structure will emerge spontaneously. There are a lot of details that inspire a reaction of, "Well, THAT can't work!", far fewer that invite a reaction of, "Yes, tell me more about that."

If I may make a suggestion, you need an elevator pitch: a concise summary of the problem and your proposed solution that can be read or heard quickly, and spark a discussion. Then all that detail becomes useful.

Expand full comment