One Of The Reasons For Why Our Nation Is So Divided

 One of the best, if not the best, quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. is below. It was part of his speech/sermon against the Vietnam War:

'The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just'

Now if we replace the word 'Western' with a fill-in-the-blank, we get an idea of why we are so divided in this nation:

'The ______ arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just'

According to the above modified quote, the reason why America is so divided is that we Americans have an abundance of arrogance. I say an abundance because there are quite a few individuals and groups that believe that they have everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them. And the more ideological a people becomes, the more vulnerable they are to succumb to such an arrogance of feeling. Also we should note that this arrogance of feeling has crossed all ideological lines quite some time ago.

But perhaps there is something else involved here in addition to, or even a part of, that arrogance of feeling. After all, just think of what one must know to actually have all of the answers to the major economical, political, or social issues in our world. To know all of the answers would be attribute which we would more likely to associate with God, not people.

Just perhaps some of that arrogance is an exhibition of compensation, or overcompensation to be precise. And what could be driving the need to compensate or even overcompensate? It could be an overcompensation for feeling a lack of significance. It could be an overcompensation for having been looked down on, or having experienced marginalization, or, in the case of my fellow religiously conservative Christians, having suffered a massive loss of status in society while believing that we are special or better than others. And thus to feel significant, one dreams of astounding others with one's own or their group's abilities. In this case, that ability would be discovering or having the right beliefs that allows them to possess all of the answers to a certain set of political, economical, or social problems which a nation or the world needs.

To argue with facts and logic with someone who is seeking to feel significant can easily be counterproductive. That is because as the facts and logic challenges a given person's ideology, it is threatening their personal sense of significance. And so challenging such a person's ideology can easily be perceived as a threat by that person. 

Now that is as far as my mind can take me on this subject. That is because I am still stuck at the stage of arguing with a such a person using only facts and logic. I don't know enough about how to address issues without challenging a person's sense of significance. 

But what I can ascertain here is that with all of the divisions we currently have in our nation, feeling insignificant might be at endemic levels in our nation. I am sure that there are a multitude of reasons for why many feel insignificant. And why a person or group feels insignificant must be studied on a case by case basis.

And so perhaps the next time any of us get into a heated debate where the other person acts as if they, their ideology, their religion, or whatever else enables them to believe that they have all of the answers, consider what their beliefs say about them. For people are partially like stars. By that I don't mean that people are bright. And I am certainly referring to the fact that some people are full of gas. 

What I am referring to is what we see when we see stars in the sky. Yes, we see light. But in terms of time, what do we see? We see the past.

So when we see or hear people, we are seeing their pasts. But because people are only partially like stars, we see more than people's pasts; we see their present too. And deciphering what is reflecting a person's past from observing their present behavior and words is not an easy task and is filled with opportunities to make errors. But this fact that our words and behaviors can reveal our pasts should temper our reactions to what they say or do with which we strongly disagree.

Just suffice it to say that feel insignificant seems to be endemic in our society. That could be the result of our lifestyles. It could be the result of our own values. It could be the result of the values of our society and/or culture. It could be the result of our nation's history. And it could be the result of our own past. And so no matter how strongly  with which disagree with someone, we must not talk down to them or act as if we are superior. We must not do that, but of course we all will at times.

 

The Cornerstone Of Divisiveness In America

 Divisiveness in America can be best explained by the following Martin Luther King Jr. quote (click here for the source):

The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

The above quote is part of King's speech against the Vietnam war given on April 4th, 1967 at Riverside Church in New York City. Now that quote alone doesn't really explain our divisiveness. But if we modify that quote by replacing the word 'Western' with a fill in the blank, then we have happened on the real cause for divisiveness in America:

The ________ arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

Why the fill-in-the-blank? It is because there are a number of groups in America that have that kind of arrogance of feeling to varying significant degrees. And as a result, each group that has that kind of arrogance of feeling is doing its part to split up the country. In addition, each group that has that kind of arrogance of feeling is speaking from the assumption that it is omniscient and thus not only does not need any input from others, but all such input is then logically deemed as a threat. And thus, each group that has that kind of arrogance of feeling is saying to all others in the nation that it is either their way or the highway.

Of course it isn't just groups that have that kind of arrogance of feeling, people can too. Two such people who come immediately to mind are Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis. Either name could fit very well in the fill in the blank. It is easy to see that kind of arrogance of feeling in Trump. After all, one of his campaign claims was that he was the only one who could fix things in America. Unfortunately the fixing he did only further entrenched the swamp which he said he opposed.

It's not to difficult to see that kind of arrogance of feeling in Ron DeSantis either. His political revenge against Disney for campaigning against one of his bills along with his political war against CRT and wokism reveal that he sees himself as the only arbiter of truth and history in America--or at least in Florida. That means that he acts as if CRT and wokism have nothing to contribute to our understanding of race and other issues from America's past and present.

Of course, that arrogance of feeling on the conservative side was spawned by conservative pop conservative radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin. Each one divided ideas and even Americans into 2 categories of either agreeing with them or being totally wrong. These radio show hosts canonized their version of conservatism and demonized everyone else. Being a good or patriotic American required one to do nothing more than to express a general agreement with or like of these radio hosts. From their shows came the idea that their version of conservatism would fit well in that fill in the blank. 

And though I can't think of any liberals who embrace that kind of arrogance of feeling, there are individual democratic voters who would unflinchingly insert the name 'democrat' into that fill in the blank. Likewise, they have Republican counterparts who would do the same with the name 'republican.' 

I know some fellow leftists who would proudly insert the name 'marxist' or socialist' in that fill in the blank. The ones I know are not public figures. But the groups they belong to believe that they have everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them. Such people include many Stalinists and ideological Marxists. 

In the end, those who are most vulnerable to having that kind of arrogance of feeling are traditionalists and ideologues. We should note that traditionalists are defined by their social, ideological, or geographical locations. By ideologues, I don't mean those who generally or loosely hold to a given ideology. Instead,  by ideologues I mean those who see their favorite ideology as having all or almost all of the answers to America's problems so that they believe that their ideology is the only ideology America needs to thrive.

Why do we embrace such a delusion of grandeur about our favorite politician, political party, or ideology? One reason, and certainly not the only reason, has to do with the sense of significance rush that comes with believing that one's side is so exceptional and above the others.

And isn't it in our American DNA that our sense of significance as Americans comes from being exceptional and the greatest in the world? We see this compulsion to regard ourselves as being exceptional above all others in how we talk about our history. This is especially true for those Americans who try to censure CRT from being taught to students or business people.

We also see it in our sports. How many world championships are played for by American teams only? Here we should note that Japan won the most recent World Baseball Classic championship. And of the 5 or 6 such classics, the U.S. has won the championship only once.  

We see it in our music. How many times have baby boomers regarded the music they grew up with as the greatest music in the world despite the fact that there are some regions of the world where the music is far more rhythmic, expressive, and deep.

We see it in our foreign affairs we we assume that America is the leader of the free world. Here, one has to ask why a free world would need a leader or how can part of the world that has one leader really be free? But more than that, we often assume, at least initially, that our foreign policies are good and righteous and have the world's best interests at heart. That was certainly true during the Cold War and is true, to a weaker degree, in the War Against Terror.

We also see this arrogance of feeling in some of our conservative churches. Those denominations that believe that their doctrinal standards and confessional standards best summarize what is in the Scriptures are very vulnerable to having that kind of arrogance of feeling. That is especially true when complete subscription to a denomination's confessional standards is required among its church officers. And Christians partially have that kind of arrogance of feeling when they believe that they have everything to teach the secular world and nothing to learn from them even when it comes to secular issues.

That kind of arrogance of feeling not only has us competing in America's market place of ideas, it makes us conclude that our beliefs are in a life and death struggle for the nation in king-of-the-hill battle with all other ideological or political party challengers.

Perhaps it isn't the life and death struggle that mostly drives us to having that arrogance of feeling. Rather, it is the sense of significance we gain by believing that we have everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them that maintains that delusion about ourselves and the groups we are in. I am beginning to suspect that many political debates between people do not involve a contest of ideas as much as they involve the defense or assertion of one's sense of significance and the pride that comes from believing that oneself, one's own group, or one's ideology is exceptional and above all others.

Therefore, perhaps it is our compulsion to feel special and exceptional, either as individuals or in groups, that is contributing the most in the current dividing of our nation.