The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Joseph W. McDonnell is a professor of public policy and management at the Edmund S. Muskie School of Public Service at the University of Southern Maine.
Abraham Lincoln’s efforts to bridge the seemingly unbridgeable divide in the country in the middle of the 19th century provide valuable lessons for us to reduce the political polarization plaguing our country and state.
Lincoln attempted to forge a middle ground by taking a moral stance against slavery but promoting a pragmatic policy to leave slavery in the southern states in perpetuity while prohibiting its expansion beyond those states. He also vowed to uphold the Fugitive Slave Act to the dismay of his fellow Republicans who opposed policies to accommodate slaveholders.
Lincoln sought to persuade with his pragmatism acknowledging that there were no easy solutions to slavery in the southern states. Despite his proposals to placate his southern countrymen he could not overcome their mistrust to convince them to support even the continuance of the status quo.
The polarization had reached a point where the North and South were living in two different worlds, which brought democracy to an impasse. In frustration, Lincoln concluded that the only thing that would convince the South would be for the rest of the country to stop calling slavery wrong and join their southern countrymen in calling slavery right and let it spread to the whole nation. The South’s identity had become fused with slavery such that persuasion ceased to be possible.
Yet Lincoln did not stop trying to reason with his southern countrymen. He urged his fellow Republicans that even though the southern people will not listen to us we ought to “calmly consider their demands and yield to them if, in our deliberate view of our duty, we possibly can.”
When he could not persuade the slaveholding states with reason he resorted to empathy by declaring “we are not enemies but friends” and we “must not break our bonds of affection.”
Lincoln sought to reawaken shared values toward democracy in his southern countrymen by reminding them of the heritage handed down to them from the country’s founders – “the mystic chords of memory.” He tried to ignite dormant feelings for the country in the hope his fellow countrymen might put aside their anger and open their minds to the possibility of persuasion.
Lincoln came to understand that democracy requires a common set of values that binds majorities and minorities together but it breaks down when minorities seek to rule over majorities or majorities exercise tyranny over minorities or part of the country withdraws from the whole.
Today, we resemble our 19th century compatriots locked into our ideological chambers – sealed tight to prevent the possibility of persuasion. Unlike those compatriots, we do not enjoy the vivid memory of the founding fathers and their noble experiment in democracy.
We have become tribal with our identities wrapped up in our ideologies, mistrusting those outside our political circle. We lack a common source of information or even a common set of facts. Our media and political leaders reinforce our grievances and manipulate them to drive us apart rather than bringing us together.
Lincoln might urge us today to set aside the distorted notion of democracy where political factions seek to gain a slim majority to impose their will on the other half of the country. Genuine democracy finds the elusive middle ground by taking into account the interests of both majorities and minorities.
Lincoln might advise us to put ourselves in the shoes of our opponents, revitalize debate, open ourselves to compromise and the possibility of being persuaded.
At the end of the war, Lincoln meditated on the will of God, wondering why God let the war go on so long and which side might enjoy divine favor. In his second inaugural address, Lincoln concluded that God condemned both sides for their complicity with slavery, which brought the war.
We may lack the religious sensibility of the 19th century but recognizing our mutual complicity in weakening our democracy may be the first step toward saving it.