Patrick Buchanan, as usual, has insights contrary to the perceived wisdom of most pundits. Here he defends Obama's willingness to talk with tyrants.
Along with Bachanan, I think Obama's phrasing of his position should have been more precise and nuanced; nevertheless, I'm inclined to agree with the substance of his thesis. No matter how vile a tyrant is, he remains a person, capable of reason and capable of good. To assume in principle that you can't reason with him is a form of despair.
Unfortunately, this despair infects our thinking about the opposition in political, social, and cultural matters. We demonize our opponents as evil, unreasonable, and not worth engaging in conversation. We defend our moral issues as the only legitimate moral issues. How often, say, in the abortion debate, does the pro-life side sit down with the pro-choice side in an effort to understand the moral concerns of each other? More often, we seek to defeat the opposition, either in real wars or in culture wars.
That we often interpret our differences through the metaphor of war reveals a lot about who we are. This interpretive framework we've constructed could use some deconstruction.
Pages
