In the present polarized climate, there is a constant battle between two ever-more irreconcilable sides. I think this is a good trend since the two parties do not live the fiction of getting along when the points of division are so great.

I applaud any effort that results in moral clarity. It clears the air when you make the distinction between right and wrong, or even male and female. Anything is better than the mush of moral relativism that allows the worst excesses and provides cover for unprincipled, mediocre souls.

No Such Thing as Half-an-Abortion

Those who defend God’s law cannot compromise. They have to affirm their position entirely. The moral law forms a whole. There is no such thing as “a half-sin” when it comes to procured abortion. It is intrinsically evil. It is always wrong.

Thus, I have no problem with this vigorous defense of an objective moral law and a corresponding offensive against moral evils.

Polarization divides the waters; it defines the sides. However, what concerns me is the manner in the way this polarization is now being fought.

Fencing Lessons

What’s happening reminds me of learning how to fence. The goal of fencing is to develop the art of attack and defense with the foil, small sword or saber. Students learn certain techniques that enable them to engage with certainty, method and grace.

The beginner, who does not yet know these techniques, tends to swing at anything that comes. One’s first bouts resemble brawls where each person survives by slashing at the attacks of the other with great force and energy. Without proper footwork, the person does not know how to take advantage of positions and thus ends up all over the narrow piste. Such beginners quickly become extremely exhausted, even to the point of not caring, but only wanting to get out of the fight.

Later, the fencer learns techniques that channel the opposition’s moves, to parry and thrust with minimal effort. Practicing footwork enables the fencer to be well-positioned for the fight without excessive and tiring movements. No fight is easy, but the able swordsman can easily survive without exhaustion and even with great exhilaration.

Logic and tactics prevail over impulse and emotion. And while the latter may win some points in the chaos of the moment, the experienced fencer, relying on principles, always has the advantage, grace and stamina to prevail.

Fencing in Reverse

Polarization today reminds me of this fencing process in reverse. We are “unlearning” the art of political debate and descending into the exhausting brawl where anything goes.

Rules of logic and civility kept some semblance of order inside our morally decadent society. These guardrails helped minimize the chaos and fatigue of discord.

Now everything has changed as a postliberal society challenges all narratives. Postmodern leftist thought further denies identity, logic and unity. That’s why the political scene, especially on the left, has degenerated into knock-down brawls without rules and civility. Brutality, vulgarity and cancellation prevail. People act like beginning fencers who slash and thrust at anything that moves; eventually, everyone ends up rolling around in the mud.

Responding in Kind

The problem with brawling is that it eventually drags everyone down to the lowest possible point. No one escapes unscathed.

With each leftist outrage, the constant temptation of the right is to respond in kind, with brutality. Class struggle narratives, for example, generate counter-narratives of oppressive liberals. Marxist theory is flipped rightward instead of repudiated outright. Vulgarity is met with a counter-vulgarity, personal attacks with similar insults.

This grueling fight provides plenty of spectacle, but it is exhausting for all. It leads some—especially many who defend morality—to throw up their hands in despair and give up. They are tempted to leave everything muddled without resolution and retreat to the comfort of some Benedict Option.

Learning to Fence Again

This political brawling is killing us. Everyone blames it on our polarization. However, polarization does not have to lead to brawling. We should resist the temptation to roll around in the mud and learn to fence again.

Polarization should lead to refining, not degrading, our political discourse. By fencing, we can beat our postmodern adversaries since their lack of logic, narrative and decorum becomes more apparent by contrast.

Brawling does provide moments of apparent, brutal success, but the real advantage is always with those who fence with intelligence, grace and method.

Avoiding brawling does not imply a cowardly unwillingness to engage. To the contrary, political fencing increases our capacity to engage untiringly. We fight with even greater determination, energy and panache. We display the beauty of our fight. We take joy in the justice of our cause.

Seeking Moral Clarity

Polarization, rightly considered, should strive toward moral clarity. Each side must present its case before its extreme partisans and the general public.

One pole consists of those who believe there is right and wrong and affirm that good and evil are irreconcilable. This view confides in a good and loving God who is the source of all order. Thus, its partisans generally prefer to fence by adopting discipline, civility and rules to achieve their goals. This pole does not hide its goals to the general public.

The other pole hates order, especially Christian order. Its activists hide behind moral relativism, license, and chaos. This side will always seek to take the unbridled passions to their extreme consequences. It hates moral clarity, definition and purpose. This pole reveals itself to its radicals but disguises its extreme goals and denounces the other pole as extreme. Thus, it prefers the confusion of the brawl.

The real fight of polarization is between those who desire clarity and those who do not. It does not consist of choosing between two equal options, but whether order or disorder will prevail. The pole defending order must not cede to the temptation of entering the brawl. The future belongs to those who fence.

___________

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

The featured image is courtesy of Wikimedia Commons or Wikimedia Commons.