Excerpt From “Dissidently Speaking: Change the Words. Change the War” From Human Event’s Brent Hamachek
A new book from Human Event’s Brent Hamachek titled Dissidently Speaking: Change the Words. Change the War, is a collection of both updated previously published content, with worldwide readership and academic acclaim, combined with new material that addresses the conflict within society, the conflict between individuals, and the conflict inside ourselves. Hamachek’s goal is to get people to flip two words in the English language. Stop saying “It is” and start asking “Is it?”
In the book’s first chapter titled, “An Idea for Ending Our National Division,” Hamachek makes the argument that the terms “right-wing” and “left-wing” have no actual real meaning and are simply used a means by which to label people and create division. He argues that the real structure in the American political dynamic is that of two teams, each equipped with oppositional platoons and a hierarchical structure that shifts internally in response to whatever current topic is the “hottest.” It is a dynamic rather than static structure.
This brief excerpt from that chapter focuses on DailyClout’s own Dr. Naomi Wolf and how her independent and courageous exercise of critical thinking during the pandemic had her “ousted” from “Team Left.” The author attempts to illustrate through Dr. Wolf’s example both the importance of critical thinking and skepticism and the attendant risks one takes when exercising both in today’s binary-based “team” climate.
v2 BRENT HAMACHEK PRESS RELEASEEXCERPT:
For agreed-to terminology, let’s call each separate issue-based group on a team a “platoon.” For any Team Right members who might be wondering why I have not included the mainstream media, entertainment industry, academia, or large corporate boardrooms as Team Left members, the answer is simple. These are not political positions. They are professional positions from which occupants can use the tools of their trade to support team objectives. There are plenty of Team Right journalists, professors, corporate leaders, etc. Team Left has simply done a better job of placing their members inside those various professions.
There is much to cover with regard to how these teams are structured and how they function. As I work through this, please keep in mind that we live under a bell curve. I offer this structure as a working theory that explains the general behavior of people at and near the imaginary mean and a few standard deviations away therefrom. You will certainly know people who do not “fit” into this model (I no longer fit, although I was a Team Right member for decades prior to coming to understand this structure. I then “retired” from team political sports). I would suggest that outliers will, in fact, prove the rule. They will almost exclusively contain people who are highly critical, skeptical, and independent thinkers. Those are not categories into which average citizens generally fall, certainly not en mass. […]
[…] Another interesting aspect of the model is how it is not set in stone and is open to additions. The COVID-19 pandemic is a current and fascinating example. I have written a book about the pandemic and much information can be found elsewhere, but for now, focus on the formation of two new platoons on the two teams: the platoon that favored mandates and vaccinations on one team and the platoon that cried for medical freedom on the other.
Many people have wondered why the pandemic had to become a political issue. After all, shouldn’t questions about medicine and public health transcend other political differences that in comparison seem quite pedestrian? The answer is that the team framework is where our country forces every issue. There was never any chance that the pandemic and public health measures would stay above politics. We are built for dichotomy. Very quickly these two oppositional platoons formed, joined their oppositional teams, and were elevated to the status of most important in the competitive game of American politics.
The formation of those platoons and their elevation in importance also created an opportunity to study what it meant to be a “bad teammate” and how those teammates were treated by those wearing the same jersey. No better example exists than that of Dr. Naomi Wolf, the brilliant writer and a leader in the “third wave of feminism.”
For decades leading up to the pandemic, Dr. Wolf had not just been a strong Team Left member but had been one of its most respected platoon leaders. As an outspoken feminist, she was a sort of MVP as her platoon moved up and down in team importance over decades based upon what issues were most pressing in any particular moment.
When the pandemic began and new platoons were forming, Dr. Wolf, a brilliant independent mind and critical thinker, began to have serious doubts about the various governmental measures of controls and mandates. She became increasingly convinced of what she perceived as both their ineffectiveness and even potential danger. She started to speak out, and Dr. Wolf has a very loud voice.
How did her fellow Team Left members respond to her critical thinking and its public expression? The answer is through almost universal condemnation and vilification. Dr. Wolf had betrayed her teammates. While the two COVID-generated platoons might have been only newly formed, they had quickly risen to high importance on both teams. For Dr. Wolf to come out against the most important platoon on her team at that moment was treasonous. In a matter of months, those who had previously lauded her work threatened her and condemned her on social media. Over a span of time, Team Left effectively placed Dr. Wolf on waivers and left her to either be claimed by Team Right or to remain a free agent.
You can use the Dr. Naomi Wolf case as an example and apply it to all kinds of people who have had similar public experiences. Also, you can likely see it happen outside of the headlines within your own personal circle, especially if that circle is occupied mostly by members of one of the two teams.
Have you ever experienced having a friend who virtually always agrees with you and your other friends take a contrary position on an issue that is very “hot” at that moment? What happens often is that the person who breaks orthodoxy finds themselves being excluded from the next dinner gathering.
Dr. Wolf is an exception to the team member structure that proves the rule. When she decided to break ranks and apply her own independent thought and analysis to the pandemic, she effectively had decided to leave a team, whether she realized or not that she had even been a member. Likewise, team members began to renounce her even if they might not understand why they were so doing.
One of our country’s most important freedoms is that of free speech.
Agree with this essay? Disagree? Join the debate by writing to DailyClout HERE.