On facing an unreasonable opposition
by Melvyn L Fein
October 14, 2013 11:13 PM | 1092 views | 1 1 comments | 43 43 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Melvyn Fein
Melvyn Fein
Many years ago, when my younger sister and I fought, my mother would ask me to allow Carol to have her way. Someone, she said, has to be the reasonable one and, since you are older, that is your responsibility. You must understand her even if she cannot understand you.

The result was that Carol tended to get what she wanted more frequently than I did. No doubt she would disagree. Nevertheless, I was the one regularly lectured on being reasonable. Now, as an adult, I discover that not much has changed. There are still times when I am required to be reasonable because others are not.

Congressional Republicans must now deal with a quandary not unlike the one I first faced when I was 4. They, too, find themselves confronting an adversary that will not give an inch. Consequently, they too are told to be reasonable; “You know you can’t win, so give up!”

No doubt Democrats also believe they are being reasonable in their budgetary intransigence. As they see it, they are on the side of the angels in both the Obamacare funding and debt ceiling battles. Because victory in each of these is deemed absolutely necessary, they bridle at Republican resistance.

Yet, which side is it that has insisted there can be no negotiations? And which side is it that has said “no” to virtually every compromise sent from the House to the Senate? And which side is it that daily hammers its opponents with epithets indicating that they are vicious and uncaring?

Oh, I know that the on-going political battle is generally depicted as a childish food fight in which both sides are equally responsible. I also know that the Republicans are charged with initiating the fracas because they attached a rider to the budget bill defunding Obamacare.

But if you observe what has happened, you find a decided lack of symmetry. Both the president and congressional Democrats have called Republicans terrorists, arsonists, anarchists, extremists, extortionists and jihadists. Yet, in return, the Republicans have usually limited themselves to decrying Obama’s lack of leadership and depicting Obamacare as a train wreck in the making.

By the same token, Democrats routinely charge Republicans with being reckless and needlessly shutting down the government. Republicans are also said to be placing the entire global economy at risk. Why is it, however, that if things are this bad, Democrats have refused to offer counter-proposals — except do things entirely their way?

Ever since the time of Alexis de Tocqueville, the genius of the American democratic system has been that opposed parties are willing to compromise. The one glaring exception, of course, concerned slavery and it resulted in a civil war during which more Americans lost their lives than in any other of our wars.

Obama and his allies, unfortunately, spurn compromise. They even reject budgetary stopgaps as “piecemeal” and thus unacceptable. As one of the president’s own advisors recently divulged, their goal is to utterly destroy the Republicans. They want a complete victory, whatever the collateral damage.

For my own part, I consider this attitude absolutely unreasonable. Some Republicans may have overshot the mark. The Democrats, however, refuse even to enter a conversation. This approach, though they pose otherwise, is immature and out of keeping with our nation’s traditions.

If the American people do not realize this, and if the media chorus continues to distort realities, they too are complicit in undermining a political practice that has made America great. The notions that “we won the election” and that Obamacare is “the law of the land,” and that therefore the other side must shut up and be satisfied with nothing is profoundly anti-democratic.

So what should Republicans do? The lesson I learned as a child was that being reasonable can make you vulnerable to unreasonable people. What I also learned is that the best response is to continue being reasonable. In the long run, descending to the level of a childish foe is dangerous for all concerned.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D., is a professor of sociology at Kennesaw State University.

Comments-icon Post a Comment
East Cobb Senior
October 15, 2013
Mel, unfortunately we are now living in the “age of antithesis”. What was wrong is now right, bad is now good, reasonable is now unreasonable, and what was common sense is now non-sense. So to try to make any sense out of the "new normals” we now confront is an exercise in futility.

It has come to the point that in order to right the ship of state we need, in the next election, to rid ourselves”, at all levels of government, of the entire entrenched “Political Class. Then impose term limits to retard its future growth, shrink the size of government, and get back to our Founders vision of citizen legislators.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides