Discussion, Division, and the Dark Legacy of the Tennis Court
The problem with civil discourse in the United States . . . wait, ONE problem? There are a lot of problems with civil discourse, like closed minds, assuming people are stupid (especially if they don’t agree with you), a lack of objective assessment of any situation or issue, and dueling fact sources. “My news feed is better than yours.” Oh please. It seems we forgot what we learned during the Enlightenment.
Yes, you will say that this is my opinion. And I agree; it is my opinion based on years of observing the human condition, thinking about objective leadership, studying history, working to improve my critical and analytical skills, and a lot of biting my tongue.
There is yet another problem that we face: a loss of a sense of humor. It seems that no one can take a joke anymore but that’s okay because we’re not supposed to make jokes anymore. Instead, we tend to make fun of people that we consider beneath us because they don’t agree with us -- they simply must be uninformed, unintelligent, and lacking in a multitude of ways.
For some people in the United States, if you are not left of center there is something wrong with you. For other people in the United States who are right of center, they are giddy from a smashing victory and think they have proven something, or at least been vindicated.
To those on the Right: You won. Be gracious in victory. Attempt to be cool or at least try to act like a grown up.
The right is screaming in triumph while the left is screaming in agony. There are some differences in the world views here that are pretty obvious but I want to point out that the world is not as dark and gruesome as some might think. We do have to improve the economy, our standing internationally, and our self-esteem as a country. But the world is not coming to an end simply because we have a change in Administrations. I didn’t think that when Biden took office and I don’t think that now that Trump is back.
Where I see a disconnect is on both sides of the center: the left of center cannot admit that some of the policies they support don’t work -- no matter how many times they try them. The right of center won’t admit that some of these policies are a good idea even if they were not implemented well.
And that brings us to the tennis court. What, you might ask? What does tennis have to do with our political spectrum and division? Well I’ll tell you: it was on a tennis court that modern politics were born. It was France in the late 18th Century and a little thing called The French Revolution had happened.
When they met on the tennis court, the King was not yet dethroned but it wasn’t looking good for him.
The National Assembly first met on a tennis court because they mistakenly thought they had been locked out of their usual meeting place – demonstrating a lack of fact checking.
Word Origins has a short explanation of this terminology (https://www.wordorigins.org/big-list-entries/left-wing) :
“In political discourse, it’s routine to refer to the left and the right, with the left being the liberal/reformist faction of a body politic, and the right being the more conservative. This particular phrasing comes down to us from the French Revolution, when the more radical elements of the National Assembly tended to sit on the left side of the chamber and the more conservative elements to the right.”
Despite the belief that the monarchy was overthrown “by the people,” it was actually overthrown by several political factions within society. But a hungry mob comes in handy when you need some muscle to move your agenda forward.
As the French Revolution unfolded, the Left became increasingly influential and dominant. The Revolution became increasingly violent with more and more beheadings of “enemies of the state” – including some of the people who were considered the Leaders of the Left. The beheadings became entertainment and distraction for that hungry mob since the succession of new governments wasn’t much better at feeding the masses than the monarchy was.
The Right suffered many executions too – some children were even executed simply because they were born into an aristocratic family. The atmosphere in the country became increasingly toxic and focused on dogma rather than leadership. There was danger everywhere and an air of desperation thanks to the successful blockade of France instituted by the British Empire.
Even Josephine de Beauharnais, better known as Josephine Bonaparte, found herself in prison at great risk of losing her own head despite being a dedicated follower of the Revolution. According to Wikipedia: “Her first husband, Alexandre de Beauharnais [a former member of the Revolutionary Army], was guillotined during the Reign of Terror, and she was imprisoned in the Carmes Prison until five days after his execution.” Josephine barely escaped the same fate but thanks to the overthrow of Robespierre, the Reign of Terror ended and she was released.
After the Reign of Terror with all of its excesses ended, French society began to normalize again. There was a shift to the center and the right because the Societal Pendulum always needs to swing the other way to find a more balanced approach.
I wrote in last week’s article that “My opinion is that how (or why) something starts will always influence it no matter how long it lasts. If it has positive roots, it will thrive for a long time and provide value. If it starts in a negative place, it may hang on for a long time but it will lose value and create bad feelings.” Or lead to beheadings.
This opinion applies to the Legacy of the Tennis Court and the damage it has done to civil society. We can dismiss this legacy by letting go of our own dogmas, mental rigidity, and biases. Our focus in the 21st Century should be on progress and solutions, not disparagement and imposition of our will.
The old factions are no longer relevant but we have yet to realize it.
