I recently played a chess game (Blitz) where, going into the last minute and being 40+ moves deep, I was up a Knight and maybe a pawn or two and felt certain of victory. However, in the last 30 seconds, it became clear that there was no way to win -- he had two Bishops terrorizing me and two passed pawns. It was pretty shocking how, simply by measuring the game through the most obvious thing (material), I didn't realize I was in trouble, and my perspective did not shift until it was far too late...
Not the actual chess game but similar enough to it.
Now, take politics -- it's not a clear game with winners/losers, nor does it even have clear objectives since everyone can be valuing something different. Moreover, the board is a lot bigger than sixty four squares, and everything can be a "piece" and move.
How much more uncertain we must be of being right and whether or not we are doing/saying the right thing. How much more careful we must be when assessing the situation.
Politics should not be mutual combat & debate, but should be centered more around trying to talk about and understand a bigger problem, and to share ideas on it. Since none of us reading this completely determine the policies that are set forward, we should really feel free to discuss these things without malice...
And we should remember that, just as how we can be surprised in a game like chess that we do not actually have the full perspective necessary to win, so, too, in politics or other arenas, we should not even pretend to have the entire picture. Instead, we should simply argue our perspective and our values, presenting them persuasively, in hopes of receiving some amount of validation for our concern and hoping that the public takes into account our perspectives when they evaluate what they will advocate moving forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment