The Touch Not the Cat blog has become a place to share my journey and reflections on life and relationships.
One attitude that has provided beneficial to me over the past few decades is to expect that meditation on Scripture will inform me about the events of today. As I considered the Roman Catholic liturgical texts for Dec 4, Friday of the First Week of Advent, I found resonance with our hope for the future and my desire to decrease the tribalism in our social and political engagement in this time of tension around great change in the way we live with a global pandemic, a climate crisis, and the inequality rooted in privilege in our society. The hope in the vision of Isaiah (circa 700 BCE) “For the tyrant shall be no more, the scoffer shall cease to be” (Isaiah 29:20) and “Those who err in spirit shall acquire understanding, those who find fault shall receive instruction.” (Isaiah 29:24) prompts me to consider how we might reduce the impact of the scoffer in our discussions and be open to receive instruction that will reduce our tendency to be fault finding in our social encounters. As I ponder how to reduce the action of scoffers and fault finders, I tend to seek understanding of the social and economic playing field. An article by Aaron Wherry of CBC News has the title “Where you live is who you are: Erin O'Toole and the new culture war” He observes that as political arguments go, it has its limits. Wherry asks “Will it work?”
Readers of Stephen Harper's book Right Here, Right Now, published in 2018, will be familiar with O'Toole's framing. The former prime minister was quite taken with the idea that many Western democracies can be divided between rooted "Somewheres" and relatively rootless "Anywheres". But the theory originated with David Goodhart, a British writer whose own book, The Road to Somewhere, linked the Brexit vote to leave the European Union — and other populist revolts, including the election of Donald Trump — to divisions over culture and identity. In short, Goodhart posits that the traditional politics of left and right, liberal and conservative, are now overlaid by a "larger and looser" distinction "between the people who see the world from Anywhere and the people who see it from Somewhere." O'Toole has lamented that wages have stagnated, private sector union membership has dropped and many Canadians no longer have robust pensions or benefits. What would he do to address those things? O'Toole's Conservatives like to say that Canada has become more divided since Justin Trudeau became prime minister, an argument that rests heavily on the idea of "Western alienation." But would O'Toole's approach produce less division — or would it simply anger a different set of people? Should those whose opinions are more in line with the Anywheres worry that their priorities would be neglected or attacked under an O'Toole government? Division and frustration can be used to drive political campaigns, but it's not obvious that they make it any easier to govern. Durable, lasting change typically requires broad support.1Discussion of our response to the changes we see in our society needs to affirm the positive values of people on all sides of the debate.
References
