NOVEMBER 5, 2021, KEIZERTIMES, PAGE A7
PUBLIC SQUARE welcomes all points of view. Published submissions do not necessarily reflect the views of the Keizertimes
Ideologues exist on the
left side and the right
Diversity committee appointments
The City of Keizer adopted a
Statement of Values in December, touch-
ing on aspects of justice, equity, diversity
and inclusion.
The statement includes, among other
elements, a definition of white suprem-
acy as well as a condemnation of it; rec-
ognition of historical laws and policies
that maintained discrimination and dis-
parity; recognition of all gender iden-
tities and sexual orientations; a nod to
the Tribal Nations that once inhabited
the land; and a “commitment to ensure
that all members of the community are
free from acts that are rooted in racism,
discrimination, intolerance, bigotry and
hostility.”
Now the city council is forming a
Community Diversity Engagement
Committee to advise it on putting
actions behind that statement that was
unanimously approved by councilors.
Writing and approving the Statement
of Values should have been the hard part,
forming an advisory committee com-
prised of a diverse membership should
be easy. Yet, in today's political climate,
the hardest part of assuring equity and
inclusion may be ahead of us.
There were different thoughts
expressed at this week's city council
meeting on how to appoint members. As
originally conceived, the mayor would
appoint the nine members—including
two councilors, a youth member and six
at-large members chosen from the com-
munity. Some want each city councilor to
appoint one member, much like the way
members of the Volunteer Coordinating
Committee (VCC) are chosen.
Some have concerns about this way
of appointing members to a committee
Editorial
advising on diversity. Would politics
play too much of a role in appointments?
Without input from the VCC or a vote
of approval on each appointee from the
entire council, would we achieve the
diversity we seek?
An issue with each councilor appoint-
ing a member to the committee is some
potential members might not be aware
of the committee. Issuing a communi-
ty-wide call for applications for appoint-
ment will cast a much wider net than
individual councilor appointments. The
work of this committee will garner much
interest and attention, especially those
who represent traditionally under-repre-
sented groups.
Keizer is made up of a tapestry of races
and backgrounds. If Keizer truly wants to
live up to its Statement of Values, it owes
it to its citizens to assure that the mem-
bership of the Community Diversity
Engagement Committee is culled from
those we rarely see in such roles.
If we want engagement from the
many different people that call Keizer
home, it is an absolute that these groups
are welcomed and embraced. Committee
members should apply, just as with any
other city commmittee or board, inter-
view with the Volunteer Coordinating
Committee and face a final vote from the
city council. That is the fairest and most
transparent process.
—LAZ
WHEATLAND PUBLISHING CORP.
142 Chemawa Road N, Keizer, Oregon 97303
Phone: 503.390.1051 • www.keizertimes.com
PUBLISHER
& EDITOR
Lyndon Zaitz
publisher@keizertimes.com
FOLLOW US
ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
NEW DIGITAL
SUBSCRIPTION PRICING:
$5 per month, $60 per year
PUBLISHED
EVERY FRIDAY
Publication No: USPS 679-430
YEARLY PRINT
SUBSCRIPTION PRICING:
$35 inside Marion County
$43 outside Marion County
$55 outside Oregon
POSTMASTER
Send address changes to:
Keizertimes Circulation
142 Chemawa Road N.
Keizer, OR 97303
Periodical postage paid at Salem, Oregon
By MICHAEL GERSON
If the American experiment dies, the
cause will be terminal bothsidesism.
This is not to deny that our politics
is ideologically bipolar. There is a party
of the left that advocates ambitious gov-
ernment and progressive social values.
There is a party of the right that defends
limited government and conservative
social virtues. The differences between
the sides concern the largest matters of
penury or prosperity, sickness or health,
death or life.
But the genius of American govern-
ment has been to contain fundamen-
tal policy disagreements within a legal
structure where political victory is never
total and political loss is never final. And
Americans have generally viewed this
liberal democratic framework not only as
an efficient form of self-government but
as a noble one.
People may be rivals in a balance of
power, but they are also partners in a
great enterprise. America coheres due
to shared pride in a brilliant set of dem-
ocratic procedures crafted in the 18th
century. And the successful operation
of that system presupposes citizens with
certain democratic ideals: a respect for
truth, the rejection of politically moti-
vated violence, a commitment to social
and political equality, and reverence for
the rule of law.
Is it possible to locate ideological
hotheads on both left and right who care
nothing for democratic procedures and
values? Of course. In a country of 330 mil-
lion people, one can find plenty of anar-
chist rioters, Marxist college professors
and administrators who use tolerance as
a club to beat those they deem intolerant.
But judging their threat as equivalent to
that of the populist right is itself a threat
to the country. At some point, a lack of
moral proportion becomes a type of
moral failure.
My main concern here is with previ-
ously rational and respectable conserva-
tives who are providing ideological cover
for the triumph of Trumpism on the right.
Often some scruple prevents them from
joining fully in former president Donald
Trump’s gleeful assault on democratic
legitimacy. So their main strategy is to
assert that leftist depredations against
democracy are equivalent. If both sides
have their rioters and petty autocrats,
why not favor the rioters and petty auto-
crats whose success will result in better
judges?
But here’s the rub: By any rational
standard, both sides are not equivalent in
their public effect.
Only one party has based the main
part of its appeal on a transparent lie. To
be a loyal Republican in 2021 is to believe
that a national conspiracy of big-city
mayors, Republican state officials, com-
panies that produce voting machines
other
VOICES
and perhaps China, or maybe Venezuela,
stole the 2020 presidential election. The
total absence of evidence indicates to
conspiracy theorists (as usual) that the
plot was particularly fiendish. Previous
iterations of the GOP tried to unite on
the basis of ideology and public purpose.
The current GOP is united by a common
willingness to believe whatever antidem-
ocratic rot comes from the mouth of an
ambitious, reckless liar.
Only one side of our divide employs
violent intimidation as a political tool.
Since leaving the presidency, Trump has
endorsed the view that the events of Jan.
6 were an expression of rowdy patriotism
and embraced the cruel slander that the
Capitol Police were engaged in oppres-
sion. Turn to Fox News and hear hosts
and guests referring to a coming “purge”
of patriots, alleging that the left is “hunt-
ing” the right with the goal of putting
conservatives in Guantánamo Bay, and
speaking of “insurgency” as a justified
response.
Only one political movement has
made a point of denying the existence
and legacy of racism, assuring White peo-
ple that they are equally subject to preju-
dice, and defending the Confederacy and
its monuments as “our heritage.” This
is perhaps the ultimate in absurd both-
sidesism. My side suffers from economic
stagnation and the unfair application of
affirmative action. Your side was shipped
like coal and sold like cattle; suffered cen-
turies of brutality, rape, family separation
and stolen wages; and was then subjected
to humiliating segregation and the sys-
tematic denial of lending, housing and
justice. Who can say which is worse?
Only one president—as released doc-
uments show—attempted to overturn the
results of a fair election, tried to block
the certification of his successor and
discussed in the Oval Office the possi-
bility of imposing martial law. Only one
president had minions prepare the step-
by-step instructions for a constitutional
coup.
I could go on. Yet it gives me no plea-
sure. I would prefer to witness the return
of a principled party of the right because
I hold many conservative views on poli-
cies that I’d like to see enacted. But when
fellow conservatives claim that the GOP
remains the best of bad options, they
become contributors to the ruin of our
democracy. Only one party in the United
States is committed to liberal democracy.
And in the absence of that commitment,
influence is merely the will to power.
(Washington Post)