"Glenn Beck is a racist."

       - All of Glen Beck's detractors every day since July 28, 2009 



"Barack Obama is a racist."

          - Glen Beck, July 28, 2009

I disagreed with Beck when he said that.  I still disagree with him.  But I have listened to Beck explain his position several times and I can understand (a) that he did not draw that conclusion without having some evidence to support it and (b) why he might have reached that conclusion.  I have no reason to believe that President Obama is a racist.  Even if he is one, what real difference would that make.  Would that totally discredit every other word the man said or every political or social idea he supported? 

I'm not really sure why Glen Beck's detractors in the media think he is a racist.  I honestly stopped listening to most of those people long ago.  I have listened to why some of my friends think Beck is a racist.  I can understand (a) that they did not draw that conclusion without having some evidence to support it and (b) why they might have reached that conclusion.  Even if he is one, what real difference would that make?  Would that totally discredit every other word the man said or every political or social idea he supported? 

What does seem (to me) to make a difference is that, rather than engaging in an honest discussion about the very real political issues facing our country the people on both sides of all of those issues waste their time and ours bickering about things like this that might not exist and would not make any real difference if they did. 

Another thing I've noticed is that all the people who articulate a belief that one of those two men is a racists will defend the innocence of the other man with equal vigor.  A similar dynamic seems to be present with respect to almost every one of the issues (both the important and the not so important issues) that exhaust our nation's capacity to talk about our political and social differences.  We seem so intent on demeaning our opponents and defending the public figures who purport to reflect our existing thoughts and feelings that we have no mental and emotional energy left to contemplate the wisdom of our existing positions, much less how we came to land in those particular places. 
It seems to me that an open-minded person who is sincerely interested in discerning and understanding the truth of things would ask herself or himself a number of questions after making these observations.  Some of the more obvious questions might include:
 
How can two groups of people with no apparent learning disabilities with equal access to the same information draw such remarkably different conclusions? 
 
Does that apparent paradox reflect a healthy condition in our society? 
 
What, if any, conclusions could be drawn by the vehemence and polarization that seems rampant within our society? 
 
What if any of my existing perceptions and conclusions am I unwilling to relinquish in order to accurately and objectively divine the truthfulness of any of these issues or questions?  For that matter, can any person ever find the truth if he or she is not willing to abandon any existing conclusion, perception or fundamental assumption that refuses to yield to objective observation? 
 

Those last two might be the most important questions any person must ask upon realizing that he or she does not know what he or she does not know.  Those likely also are the two questions most neglected by every person who comes to that realization.