Agreeing to disagree about those with whom we agree to disagree

Woody Allen has this great joke: “Oh mom,” complains an Allen hero, “to you every non-Jewish girl is a shikse.”

I was reminded of that when reading Jewish Exponent editor Jonathan Tobin’s take on Sarah Palin:

Palin’s nomination has reignited the culture wars of the 1980s and ’90s, as liberals view her not merely as a representative of the political party they oppose, but as an icon of a culture they regard with snobbish distaste and trepidation.

These sentiments span the liberal spectrum, and quite notably reside within a Jewish demographic. A portion of whom had heretofore been open to the McCain candidacy. Judging by the reaction she has generated, Palin is well on her way to becoming the evangelical bogeywoman for liberal Jews who view her beliefs as the antithesis to all they hold dear. For them, the Palin phenomenon is a nightmare.

Well, yes — and why not? If you are pro-choice, anti-creationist, convinced by the evidence that humans are responsible for global warming, and a liberal, why wouldn’t you be opposed to Palin, who takes the opposite view on each of these issues? Why wouldn’t you view her with distaste and trepidation? And why wouldn’t that sour a fence-sitter on McCain — asuming they previously saw McCain as more moderate on each of these issues?

I just don’t understand what “snobbish” has to do with it, unless being a Democrat makes someone a snob. Plenty of Republicans view Obama with distaste and trepidation — I wouldn’t assume on that basis that they are racist, intolerant, or anything else. People need to be able to disagree with their political opposites without it being characterized as a character flaw.

Advertisement

Leave a Reply