Ponder this: Your neighbor grows heaps of roses. You prefer a casual explosion of azaleas.
Now read this sentence adapted from a comment on a Facebook Marketplace listing for household furniture: “I was going to buy this until I saw you were an azalea person.”
The poster’s actual response named a major political party instead of “azalea person.” To identify the party here would contradict the spirit of today’s essay.
Many of us favor a kind of yard flora. Or car make. Or we prefer linguini over spaghetti – or summer over winter.
I get it. Politics is important, public policy even more so.
But why must party affinity be the defining quality by which we assert our supposedly superior merit – and demean, belittle and “other” everyday folks who lean another way?
That’s why we have college and professional sports teams, to permit rabid, in-your-face group loyalty in contexts that are fun but unimportant.
Politics is too serious for such nonsense and too weighty for our national Hatfield-and-McCoy hate match. Just quit the hate. See the whole person.
Think flowers, neighbor.
More from 30-Second Read
Can’t we be nice to each other?
Love the “azalea people” euphemism. That said, I have a whole slew of “yeah, but … ” responses, particularly when viewing the “Team Scalise” part of the video. I want not to view the other side with hate, but how can I not when they supported the violent attempt to overthrow the government, defiled the Capitol, etc.?
I wrote this essay on Monday, two days before the attack on the capitol. After Wednesday, I considered spiking or revising it, but I decided the central point remains valid. We’re under no obligation to abide hate or haters — or insurrection. But nor should we assume greater human worth for ourselves because of our favored approaches to public policy.
Right on! And write on!