Monday, January 4, 2010

Dissent vs. Treason

I do not assert that any form of dissent against one's citizenship country is a direct line to treason. I understand the argument that trying to undermine the legitimacy and existence of the country where one is a citizen is a treasonous act. However, dissenting against the policies and perspectives, the structures and processes, of one's country and seeking to transform them, are honorable endeavors. This viewpoint is not based on the founding of the United States, as some try to claim to appease others and to enervate concerns about treason. Dissent is an invaluable right in a democratic republic, and it is a vital part of civic engagement and the political process.

One of the major problems in our public discourse is that people resort to the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem, especially when they are unable to discover any substantive way to disagree with another person's point of view. Seeking to discredit another individual rather than building a case against what that person asserts or does is simply disingenuous. People are going to engage in that illogical process continually; what we must do is to point out the ignorance, obtuseness, and puerility of it.

There are a number of policies and approaches of the Obama Administration with which I disagree. For example, I am an advocate of pacifism and nonviolent diplomacy in resolving internatonal conflict; consequently, I am opposed to the escalation of the war in Afghanistan. In addition, I believe we should address and redress the plight of the poor; consequently, I disagree with claiming merely to attend to the bolstering of the middle class and remaining impervious to the debilitating conditions of the indigent. While I feel strongly about these matters, I am not interested in personally attacking those who disagree with me. Rather, I seek to persuade them of the folly of their thought and action, because my ultimate goal is to have the ends and the means cohere (i.e., use peaceful means to reach peaceful ends) and to elimate homelessness, hunger, lack of shelter, inaccessible health care, inadequate education, unemployment, underemployment, and disease that undermine life chances and cause the resort to crime, violence, drug abuse, sex, and other symptoms, or manifestations, of hopelessness and despair.

When there are meaningful disagreements with the direction of government entities, many recourses abound that can effectuate change and steer trends in a different way. Organizing people in such multiple and variegated efforts is the beauty of democracy. Putting people down, engaging in rumors, deceptions, and lies, and concealing information and facts are anathema to the political process--even though a number of public officials and civic leaders participate in those kinds of activities. In my opinion, people who resort to such dissembling, chicanery, and hyperbole are actually behaving treasonously, and those who do not call them out on the carpet for it may also be treasonably quiescent!

Let's be clear about the nobility of dissent and the ignobility of treason. The ignominy of the latter is just as great as the probity of the former. Not to make this distinction is the kind of silence that is betrayal!