Sunday, March 26, 2017

To understand is not to condone

If I understand why people need religion, do I support it? If I understand why religion makes people kill other human beings without having any remorse, do I support such killings? If I argue for some issues propagated by some particular political party, do I support that political party? During regular discussions, while discussing various social and political issues whenever I try to argue about a less popular side or another side of the issue, people often misunderstand that I support the side about which I am arguing. The explanation, that I don't support that side, but I understand it and I want to bring those points into discussion doesn't register very well with most people. Many think that you cannot argue for any side unless you support it. Well, this may be true with many people, but not with me. During any discussion, if there is no representation for another side of the issue then there is no point in discussing that topic. There are very few topics about which there is universal condemnation but for all others, it is very important to know about all sides before drawing any conclusions. As Alan Dershowitz puts this in his book, Letters to a Young Lawyer, he writes, "To understand is not to condone, but to enlighten and perhaps to prevent the same mistake others have made." It is very important to understand that "to understand is not to condone." There is a huge difference between understanding any issue, arguing about it, or representing it in any debate, and wholeheartedly supporting it. 

For me monotonous discussions are boring. I am not interested in praising any political party or political leader unconditionally to the level of worshipping them and projecting as if things what I support are the ONLY right things. I also don't like venomous one-sided criticisms without much rationale and logic to an extent to project things in an extremely bad light. I like to have a representation from another side, if there is no one, then I volunteer to represent that side. In a liberal group, I try to represent the conservative side, and in a conservative group, I try to bring up the liberal point of view. This makes it possible to see why people criticize some particular ideology and how rational their criticism is. Very often people consider me a supporter of that particular ideology or political group (the group they oppose), which is wrong. Yes, I do have certain political preferences, but I don't support any particular political party.

Many people don't understand the importance of having a representation from another side in a discussion. This is particularly challenging in political discussions, as a politically independent person, if you try to argue the good and bad points of each political side, people often get confused. The normal expectation is that a person will choose a particular political party or a leader and defend or attack them vehemently. People try to support their chosen party, no matter what, and try to criticize their opponents, no matter what. But, if they don't see such a clear loyalty or animosity, they get confused. I have been the victim of such confusion many times. I don't mind this, as many times this is an unavoidable situation. I feel that if people understand and learn to look at both sides and try to understand the good and bad points of both the sides in any argument or debate, we will see much less political polarization and much more bipartisan collaboration.

There is no ideology or political party which is perfect with answers to all the problems. Very often best answers to questions are scattered through all over the political spectrum and we need to consider many issues before making a final decision on any major policy issues. But very often the political supporters of these leaders and parties don't understand this and fall in a trap of political polarization to the advantage of these parties and leaders. Polarization always helps someone to win an election, but it rarely helps a nation to move forward. Please understand the need to be fair to people whom you criticize, it is very necessary to understand the opponent's points of view clearly to be able to criticize it properly. Otherwise, that criticism has no value other than political rhetoric or angry passionate rants, which can be used in politically charged speeches for the supporters of that own party but are useless for any conducive political policy discussion. Try to understand opponents' views first, before commenting about them, maybe it will help to shape your own views in a much better way.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

No comments:

Post a Comment