I honestly think that if Biden does nothing else, engineering an environment where people accept basic common facts has to be somewhere at the start of it. As you say, once your base facts about reality differ there's really no hope for reconciliation about things at a higher level than that. And for all the healthy spirit of "both-sides-ism" in this thread, I will put it out there that there is one side that has egregiously allowed it and its supporters to become detached from reality. Note I'm not talking about "bias" here which both sides certainly exhibit, but concrete basic verifiable facts of reality. I really don't see how much can be achieved if we can't repair that. And as much as I want to encourage a new spirit of unity, I fear that if that becomes an excuse to not confront this problem, then it will actually just make things worse.
I agree. I don't think the vast majority of conservatives are intransigent, just so emotional wrapped up in their beliefs that they're completely unable to distinguish fact from fiction. I don't think it's a coincidence that it happened to the party that Barry Goldwater referenced in this prediction: "Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." It's not a coincidence that the qanon conspiracy is chock full of rhetoric about satanic rituals either.
> And as much as I want to encourage a new spirit of unity, I fear that if that becomes an excuse to not confront this problem, then it will actually just make things worse.
Here's why I have absolutely zero faith that a spirit of unity will work: this "situation" has been festering since the founding of this nation and every time "unity" prevailed, the can was just kicked down the road. We wanted "All men are created equal" and got the 3/5ths compromise. We tried to save the Union, only to give up on Reconstruction before it could even really begin while institutionalizing slavery in the 13th amendment. Instead of letting general Sherman raze the south, we paid for their rebuild on the backs of "free" African Americans and let them institute Jim Crow laws to continue the oppression. When the Civil Rights movement and desegregation finally came home to roost, it caused the biggest political realignment in this country's history taking us up to this point.
We wanted the best, but it turned out like always.
Nothing demonstrates more the acceptance of basic facts than pretending, when launching a campaign, that it is motivated by Trump calling white supremacists “fine people” when anyone can look at the transcript of that speech and see that a few lines below Trump explicitly condemns white supremacists.
It is unfortunate but lying openly about facts has become the only common ground in US politics, and so many people seem to be completely blind to the lies of their own camp.
I completely agree with you. I have winced about that being thrown at Trump ever since the incident - I think it was horrendously poor wording, but it was actually him in his own way attempting to unify people.
However at the same time I want to clarify that I'm talking here about a level of facts even more basic than that. That is still an interpretation of what he said but at least he said it. We have an even deeper problem right now where people believe things that are completely totally untrue. Things that are provably not true without any need to bring any interpretation into it.
For example, how do we have a reasonable discussion about how to fix social justice if one side believes most of Portland has been taken over by anarchists burning cars and smashing windows of every shop and the other things it's a peaceful hippie commune covering a block and a half? Somewhere in there is an objective truth. If we can't get to that, we're never going to have a productive discussion about the underlying problems.
He didn't call whites supremacists white people, if you listen to the rest of the sentence, he was referring to the protesters from BOTH sides that they are fine people. And then said that he condemns neo Nazis and white supremacists. I only came across this this morning btw, and I too believed he really did call them fine people..
EDIT: watch this whole thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs
"you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. [...] And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly."
What president in modern history has waited for the electoral college vote to make a victory speech? Given that Trump isn't likely to ever concede, I'm not sure what he's supposed to wait for, besides all the networks calling it. (Which they were very cautious in doing, waiting until PA was clearly out of reach.)
