The election is less than a week away and I am looking forward to the end of all the campaigning.
This election cycle has been very contentious — particularly in the presidential race. So many people are convinced that their candidate is the best option, which is not new. However, people seem to have moved beyond proclaiming that their pick is the best and now view the other candidate as not only a poor choice, but also as the enemy.
I was shocked and dismayed when I learned of the foiled plot to kidnap Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, by those who didn’t agree with her approach and policies. We don’t always agree with our political leaders, but planning to kidnap a leader we don’t approve of is extreme. I see this same adversarial attitude between the political parties, which makes solving problems extra difficult. We and our elected representatives seem to spend all our time pointing out the flaws in the other side’s position and even dismissing solutions solely because they come from the other side. When we vote, we have to pick one candidate. But when we work towards solutions, we must combine ideas.
When I teach my students about writing persuasive papers, we discuss logical fallacies or errors in reasoning. One of these is the false dichotomy, or either/or fallacy, where an argument is oversimplified to just two choices. Generally, problems have more than just two solutions and when we focus on just two, we miss out on all the other possible ways to solve the problem.
We each approach problems from different perspectives and we need to consider all perspectives and possible combinations of our ideas to find effective solutions. I saw an example of this kind of collaboration in the recent local deliberations on managing all the city-run golf courses in an effort to reduce expenses. The city presented the various options they were considering; most of which included closing the Greenbelt course. Many citizens shared their opinions about why the Greenbelt course should stay open and some offered suggestions to make it more profitable. Others proposed alternative options for managing all the courses. City leaders listened to these other perspectives and have delayed a decision to have more time to consider these citizen-proposed solutions. Additionally, the city is in the process of setting up an advisory committee to look at this issue.
Contemplating everyone’s views also helps us to get along. When we work to understand what each other values and why, we can develop compassion and look beyond stereotypes. I’ve come to enjoy the way my students expand my view. They each have their own story and views, many which are very different from mine. As I listen to their ideas, I am pushed to consider that my approach and views are not the only way nor even the best way of looking at a situation.
For example, several years ago I had multiple students write persuasive papers about why marijuana should be legalized. At the time I was firmly opposed to this stance. As I examined their ideas, I gained a better understanding of their views and I realized there were aspects of marijuana use and legalization that I hadn’t thought about before. I still have reservations, but I can see some possible benefits that could come from legalization.
As this election comes to a close, we are not all going to be happy with the results, but let’s put the contention aside and remember that the other side is not the enemy. All of our perspectives matter and collaborating yields the best solutions.
Susan Cox is one of The Republic’s community columnists, and all opinions expressed are those of the writer. She is a mother and an adjunct instructor of English at Ivy Tech Community College Columbus and Indiana University Purdue University Columbus. She can be reached at [email protected].
