At any time when somebody agrees wholeheartedly with one thing I write, I die somewhat inside.
I do know opinion columnists are presupposed to be within the persuasion enterprise, and that makes settlement the coin of the realm. However instantaneous, knee-jerk settlement makes me suspicious. That coin is devalued.
Sure, I’m completely satisfied for those who appreciated my column on Pete Hegseth’s books or loved it when my colleagues and I riffed on the cultural artifacts of the Trump period. However please don’t give me an “completely!” or a “nailed it,” not to mention a “straight fireplace!” (I need to straight douse straight fires.)
And please, by no means reply with “one hundred pc.” I’ll take principled dissent, considerate counterargument, even enthusiastic opposition over “one hundred pc.”
In the event you react to one thing I’ve stated or written with “one hundred pc” — in written, oral or emoji kind — all you’re telling me is that I most likely didn’t persuade you of something. As a substitute of fixing your considering, I affirmed it. “one hundred pc” lets me know that I’ve completed nothing however scratch your ideological itches, affirm your convictions, pinpoint your mental erogenous zones.
100% — actually? Even for those who agreed in the primary, did you discover nothing in any respect worthy of disagreement? Not even, say 3 to five %? In that case, why ought to I hassle writing, and why would you hassle studying? 100% settlement is a high-percentage failure.
Tune in to your favourite politics or tradition podcast or your favourite cable information spherical desk, and also you’ll discover many moments of one hundred pc vociferous settlement. Audiences complain in regards to the contrarian shout-fests within the mainstream media, however I’m extra troubled by the confident nod-fests.
I don’t imply the “proper” and “positive” and “after all” that litter our conversations, typically simply offering constructive reinforcement — shorthand for “preserve going” or “I see what you’re saying.” No, I imply “this!” and “co-sign” and, sure, “one hundred pc.”
I understand that maybe I’m simply overthinking figures of speech which are notably frequent on social media. (Confession: It is a factor I do. My 17-year-old son, upon listening to my newest linguistic lament, checked out me and declared, “Daddy, you detest something that enters the vernacular.”) I additionally perceive it’s way more frequent to fret about our polarization, our nationwide disunity, than to decry any compulsion towards contrived consensus.
However one ingredient driving the disagreement amongst America’s varied political and cultural camps is the push for uniformity inside these camps. When one aspect or one other embraces lock-step dogmatism relating to, say, pandemic insurance policies or gender politics or violent crime, it’s too tempting for opponents to take refuge within the exact reverse view. That’s how our views get clustered, how we “one hundred pc” know all of the issues we predict we all know.
Besides we don’t all the time realize it. Earlier than you co-sign, all the time learn the advantageous print.
After all, I peddle within the persuasion market, so a part of me definitely needs you to agree with no matter I’ve to say. Simply don’t one hundred pc agree with me. Perhaps, say, 73 %?
Seventy-three %. That’s the proportion of People who rank their funds because the top source of stress of their lives. Or the proportion of People favoring term or age limits for Supreme Court docket justices. It’s additionally the proportion of People who believe in heaven.
I’d like to activate cable information or go browsing to X or tune in to my favourite podcast and discover one speaking head nodding at one other and responding, “Oh, sure, partly! Not completely! Embers! This — however perhaps that! 73 %!” That will be heavenly.
Agreeing with me 73 % feels about proper: You’re largely on my aspect, however there’s nonetheless room for debate. An encouraging begin however with loads of work nonetheless left to win you over or so that you can win me over.
Do you agree?
