Does unity really need to be this divisive?
Unity. It’s a divisive concept. After four years of Trump claiming Democrats “want to destroy you,” calling for his political opponents to be locked up, cancel-culturing journalists, and, now, threatening democracy by promoting his election Big Lie, it was disorienting to hear President Biden speak of it. Since our two political parties have starkly differing definitions, we know it’s impossible.
For President Biden and Democrats, unity doesn’t mean policy agreement in all things, but common purpose when hashing it out. For current congressional Republicans, it means Democrats don’t propose anything they don’t like. Rejoining the Paris climate accords, for example: divisive. Unlike Trump abandoning them. Wanting to address domestic terrorism, racism, climate change, take the pandemic seriously, create meaningful election reform. Most Americans don’t consider those divisive. Today’s Republican legislators do. Solutions, if any, will have to come from Democrats.
In the evenly-divided Senate, the 50 Republicans represent many millions fewer Americans than the Democrats. Add the constitutionally unmentioned filibuster and, for much legislation, the minority has veto power, which Mitch McConnell wields like a Samurai sword.
The minority rights protected by the Constitution are civil rights. Nothing in it says the minority should hold sway on political matters. Be recognized, considered? Sure. Especially back when they weren’t a haven for the insane. But preventing the will of the majority isn’t democracy. At the extreme, where Trumpism would take us, it’s dictatorship. The filibuster needs to go: Something else that won’t happen.
-more-
https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/schwab-does-unity-really-need-to-be-this-divisive/