Opinion
Today I got caught in the middle of an argument between two good people who have very different views. There’s been a bit of a culture clash, they’re both hurt and embarrassed, and they’re both handing out the labels and mentally consigning each other to the Bad Place in a handbasket.
I might be less bothered by their inability to find common ground, but it’s Monday afternoon as I write this and soon the flights will be full of politicians of every persuasion flying back to Wellington for the Parliamentary week. For about an hour, they will literally be “he waka eke noa” – all in the same boat – but by Tuesday everyone will be facing off in the debate chamber again, and some of what “they” say will no doubt have me judging them pretty harshly, too, and vice versa.
It’s so easy to divide the world into “us” and “them”. Complexity is hard to tolerate. Everyone, me included, loves to rush to judgment. And it doesn’t take much for writing off an idea to turn into writing off the person. There are studies that show people from different political perspectives often see political differences not as disagreements among basically decent people, but as evidence that the “other side” is actually less moral or actually immoral.
It’s a problem I can’t stop picking at, because it’s also the basis for the easiest and oldest political trick in the book - convincing your audience everyone who disagrees is not just misguided but dangerously immoral has been the go-to for every warmonger ever. It becomes even easier when people are already scared, and people right now are often very scared. So much has happened to unsettle our old certainties in the last three years, and many of us have lost long-term friends and family to corrosive conspiracy theories which claim to explain (and blame) what’s happened.