Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘contradictions’

Against the Hypocrisy Charge

You may have heard–Mike Pence used private email servers and was hacked.  Jeff Sessions may have lied to Congress about conversations with Russia.  He may have called for impeachment against those who lie in an official capacity during the Clinton impeachment proceedings.  And while he has recused himself from investigations into Russian tampering with US elections, very few people think he will be impeached.  Democrats have responded by calling “hypocrite!” See Paul Begala, Bill O’Reilly for goodness sake, Salon who points out the racial hypocrisy of the “law and order” Attorney General, the list goes on. Read more

Political Contradictions as Symptoms

During primary season last year, I became pretty convinced of the view that political debate cannot stand or fall on the strategy of calling out contradictions.  Yet as I noted around that time, some entire projects are based on contradictions.  Socrates describes his efforts to encourage reflection in his interlocutors as a project of calling out the contradiction between what they say they are committed to and how they live.  He has to assume that people don’t want to be at odds with themselves.

Yesterday the President signed an executive order that bars refugees and citizens of seven Muslim countries.  He explained the move with reference to the 9/11 attackers.  As Michael D. Shear and Helene Cooper at the New York Times write:

Most of the 19 hijackers on the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa., were from Saudi Arabia. The rest were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon. None of those countries are on Mr. Trump’s visa ban list.

Here we seem to have a contradiction between the case the President is making for why this executive order is justified, and the reality that the order does not apply to any of the countries that would make this explanation have any legitimacy.  I only want to suggest that this contradiction itself is a symptom, which Emanuela Bianchi in The Feminine Symptom says “discloses dysfunction, but also as a sign, points beyond itself, telling us to look elsewhere for its cause.”  The contradictions tell us this is not the cause, look elsewhere.  I believe this is true for this executive order, for the one about a border wall, and for arguments against abortion, among many other contradictions.  The contradictions are not failures of thought or an unwillingness to be consistent, lack of concern for getting ones logos or account in line with her bios or way of living.  The contradictions signal that something else is going on: not concern for protecting borders, but xenophobia, not concern for the terrorism, but Islamophobia, coupled with an investment in protecting business interests (thus leaving off the countries where Trump has such interests), not concern for human life, but patriarchy and misogyny.

Socrates gets a bad name for being the guy who is always trying to point out the ways people are contradictory as if his whole ethical approach is “gotchya” journalism.  But what if instead Socrates aims to let the symptom appear, acting not only as the midwife, but the doctor?  It is still probably the case that people will not be convinced to think otherwise because the contradiction in their position has been articulated.  But I don’t think that means we should ignore the contradictions and cease pointing them out, but instead take them as a signal that something else is indeed going on.

Day 14: Calling out Contradiction: Neoliberalism

As I discussed in this post earlier this month, pointing out contradiction in someone’s position as a means to convert them to your view doesn’t work.  Most people recognize that holding contradictory positions is not a good thing, but few seem to think that such a charge demands of them that they change their minds or their ways.  It isn’t even that they defend themselves and try to show that they don’t maintain contradictory views.  They just aren’t moved by the charge.  So pointing out contradictions, as enjoyable as it is, is probably not the best approach for changing people’s minds. Read more

Day Three: Conversion Practices

On New Year’s Day, I visited my Uncle Jon in Chicago.  He is a member of JPUSA, a Christian commune in Uptown.  He’s a feminist progressive Christian who is more aware of his white male privilege than any Christian man I know, so it’s refreshing to spend time with him.  He was telling us about his changing views on evangelism.  He described a certain perspective on efforts at conversion that he called, “dive bombing.”  “Dive bombing” is when you come from above and attempt to strip your target of their (false) understanding of the world so that you can then replace it with yours.  This approach, he pointed out, is very condescending.  And it works by establishing that someone else is wrong.  So it’s basically gaslighting evangelism. Read more