Save For Later

In the wake of Ohio voters deciding that they wanted abortion rights to be part of their state constitution, Republican Senator from Ohio J.D. Vance took to X to lay out five insights that he felt explained the outcome. Part of insight Four is that the pro-life side needs to do a better job of persuading people to see things (and then vote) their way.

And I'm not just talking about 30 second TV commercials--I'm talking about sustained, years long efforts to show the heart of the pro life movement.

Fair enough. This is, after all, one of the facets of participatory government; enough of the participants have to be persuaded to structure things in the way one would like. But then, as part of his conclusion, Senator Vance notes:

There is something sociopathic about a political movement that tells young women (and men) that it is liberating to murder their own children.

So... about that "much better job of persuasion." When was that going to start, exactly? Because as near as I can tell, "the heart of the pro life movement" is currently about looking down on people who have concluded that being pregnant is bad enough for them in one way or another that they feel the need to do something about it.

This strikes me as one of the problems with the way people talk politics in the United States; they make public statements, with the presumption that they people they're making statements about are somehow incapable of encountering or understanding those statements. Why would anyone want to give someone who thinks of them as having been tricked by sociopaths into being a child murderer the time of day? Especially when those supposed sociopaths are working for something that the person thinks is in their best interests?

Senator Vance is far from the only person who tends to see the present as being a time to insult the people that they claim they need to persuade of something in the future. The question becomes: When does this future actually arrive? Yes, Senator Vance was speaking to fellow supporters of the pro-life movement. But did he really need to remind them that they consider pro-choice messaging lies, obfuscation and propaganda? Or that they consider the practice of abortion to be morally bankrupt? Who in the pro-life movement hadn't received that particular memo yet?

Persuasion relies on the person one is attempting to persuade seeing one as being on their side, or at least understanding their problems and interests. Public statements portraying people as dupes of the dangerously mentally ill work directly against that, because it betrays a lack of trust. I use this analogy a lot, but I'll come back to it because I think it's apt. When I pull up to a automobile showroom, the salesperson who greets me may very well be convinced that I'm driving the wrong car. But their first move is almost always to complement me on my current automobile, and from there, find out what needs it doesn't meet that a car they can sell me will fulfill. If they think poorly of me for my previous choice, the last thing that they're going to do is say so anywhere that I'm going to find out about it. Good salespeople don't disparage their customers where their customers can hear them.

American political discourse is often too suffused with moral certainty for its own good. Morality doesn't care what someone's interests or needs are; it simply demands obedience. No need for persuasion. It's part of the reason why Republican lawmakers in the Ohio legislature attempted to change the threshold for ballot measures to succeed. But moral stands also sanction looking down on others; after all, they have to be unintelligent, gullible or immoral to have done wrong, correct? So why have any respect for them?

Because persuasion requires seeing the other person as having a right to do as they are doing; it requires seeing that persuasion carries the burden of proof. It's burden that a lot of political speech in the United States simply refuses to shoulder. Because "sustained, years long efforts?" There will be time for that tomorrow. Today is best spent reminding the righteous of their superiority, lest they forget.