In 1789, those loyal to the monarchy in France gathered together on the right side of the president of the National Assembly, while those pushing for revolution gathered to his left. One deputy, the Baron de Gauville, explained: “We began to recognize each other: those who were loyal to religion and the king took up positions to the right of the chair so as to avoid the shouts, oaths, and indecencies that enjoyed free rein in the opposing camp.” And so the tradition of belittling your political opponents andlabelling conservatives “Right” and liberals “Left” was born.

The distillation of a posture towards all of life, art, ethics, politics, religion, etc. down to fundamentally two options seems apparently silly. Isn’t life self-evidently more complicated than two options? But we crave simplicity. We are pattern-seeking creatures who are always on the lookout for mental shortcuts that relieve us of unnecessary information-processing. That is why in late 2021 it was tempting to assume someone’s political affiliation depending on whether or not they wore a mask. And as the consequences in our dissolving national identity continue to ratchet up, it feels like everything is now “coded” as Right or Left. 

From your view on national debt, to immigration, to even seemingly benign choices like what chicken sandwiches or ice-cream you eat involves casting a vote in a Manichean struggle between dark and light. It isn’t even just a commentary on what you think about something out there, but is about you being a good person or not.

Are you a progressive urbanite who celebrated the Obergefell decision…and believe that children shouldn’t undergo gender reassignment surgery? Heartless conservative.

Are you a God-fearing conservative with an American flag flying from your pick-up…and think immigration should be easier? Liberal elite.

Bill Maher, a self-described “never married, childless, pot-smoking libertine” has somehow become a kind of folk-hero of the Right because he is willing to criticize the worst excesses of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, Liz Cheney became a villain in the GOP because she said Joe Biden didn’t steal the 2020 election. The seminary I graduated from has been accused by people on the Right and Left of “drifting” in the wrong direction. It somehow was both a bastion of systemic racism and a proponent of critical race theory…at the same time. *shoulder shrug emoji*

People tend to define themselves by what they oppose, which means they don’t really have to think all that much. “My view is just the opposite of the bad guys.” And if you tell me you are a fellow conservative/liberal, but you don’t hate what I hate, then I view you with suspicion, as being a possible turn-coat. Because, of course, the only engine driving my ideology is critique, opposition, and negativity. 

Just to make this more realistic, here is a thought experiment:

1. If you would consider yourself conservative, how would you feel about someone who also claimed to be a conservative, but thought that police stations should actively hire more minorities to work against racial prejudices in departments?
2. If you would consider yourself liberal, how would you feel about a fellow liberal who was openly critical of how Anthony Fauci handled the pandemic, who thought the government lockdowns were far too extreme?

Now, maybe you would like to think you would be able to think through those with a dispassionate rationality, maybe agreeing to disagree through a calm, intelligent conversation. But, my guess is that there is a more basic, primal urge you would have to leap over to get there. And it might be tempting to sense suddenly that a great gulf has just opened up between you and them.

Some of that is probably inevitable, but I think much of it is stoked by the way our pop-culture, Fox News and CNN, frame these discussions. We need a better way to think about life. 

A New Analogy: Orbit

Instead of thinking about our values and politics on a linear spectrum of two directions, what if we used a three-dimensional analogy? If you were to look at our solar system, planets would appear closer or farther from one another depending on where you were looking. There may be times where their orbits bring them close together, and other times they are billions and billions of miles away from one another. 

So, if I’m a planet and you are a planet, so to speak, then there may be certain issues where we align very closely. For instance, younger pro-lifers tend to be also very concerned about climate change—a typically progressive posture. Democratic candidates have now realized that their once passionate calls to “defund the police” are actually very unpopular and have become much more pro-police—sounding often like conservatives. This doesn’t mean, however, that the “Right” is drifting leftward, or the “Left” is leaning more conservative necessarily. It is just a large-scale example of what we know to be true in our personal lives: Reality isn’t “coded” Right and Left. It is messy and complicated and new circumstances and information require us to reevaluate. And, by golly, sometimes that means that the typical labelling system we use in pop-culture and politics is wrong.

The analogy of orbits is imperfect, of course. What is the “sun” that is center of gravity holding us all together? Are there any boundaries of “conservative” and “liberal”? In this analogy, are those terms even possible to be used? 

I don’t know. That’s not really the point. We don’t need to press the analogy too far. It is just to show that all of life shouldn’t be sorted into two buckets. The “Right” and “Left” are not Platonic forms society is being molded into. They are sociological adjectives that come after the fact, descriptors that usefully summarize, even while unhelpfully over-generalizing. 

And, mainly, it is sharp needle to puncture the stupidity that has come to dominate all political and cultural discourse. The impulse to make the majority of the culture war about what you are against, rather than what you are for is a sure fire way to make us invincibly stupid. Critique is necessary in life. But a life of constant deconstruction, of mockery, and “look at this stupid lib” is lazy and just reinforces your insider status in the tribe and keeps you from ever knowing what you actually support. Sure, the Left’s views on gender is ridiculous and bizarre. But how, then, will conservatives positively define masculinity and femininity in a way that isn’t just a parasite of the excesses of the Left? How do you define manhood in a way that isn’t just a trope that flies in the face of progressive views? 

Positive construction is difficult and risky and gets you few lols and is far less meme-able. Maybe it is funny to walk around with a microphone at Trump rallies and condescendingly laugh at how benighted and naive his supporters are. But it does nothing to cast a vision of what a good, true, and beautiful society actually does look like. It does nothing to extend charity and goodwill towards individuals who you may have many things you actually agree on (*gasp*). It just gets lots of snobby chuckles from the choir.

But, of course, this is why we need a Transcendent standard, a Sun that anchors us and pulls all of us—liberals and conservatives—together as we seek the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in our society. This is the beauty and utility of Christian theism which humbles and emboldens all who can receive the crucified and risen Messiah by faith.

Main Takeaway: Life is more complicated than two perspectives on everything; resist the tendency to “code” reality into one of two camps. Be willing to do the hardwork of listening with charity to people you disagree with, look for shared perspectives, and the even harder work of thinking positively about what the good, true, and beautiful life looks like.