Vade Mecum

\vay-dee-MEE-kuhm; vah-dee-MAY-\, noun:

1. A book for ready reference; a manual; a handbook.

2. A useful thing that one regularly carries about.

~~~~~~~

If you’re so unhappy with America, then you can just leave. Continual dissatisfaction with the government is rewarded with sentiments akin to “You’re being un-American” with the implication being that to voice (perhaps persistently) an opinion not reflected in the government is to defy American values.

How could anything be further from the truth? The American system itself is set up to promote unfiltered diversity of voice, and to use that voice is fulfilling an American promise. No one will go unheard. Offering an opinion and demanding change is not only not un-American, but necessary for the American system to function.

Perhaps most would prefer democracy when it works for them—it would not be a foreign premise, I think. It is certainly an appealing one, if you’re the one in power. But if real democracy was taken away (more than it has been), most people would scream in unison that they require an arena for their opinion in order for government to be successful. We cannot ask that opinions flee the arena due to their confliction with our own, nor can we ask those dissatisfied with the government to depart.

Like with science (as those writing the Constitution noticed), unpopular opinions must be voiced in order for balance and order to be maintained; in order for government to be successful and representative of the masses. Revolution is stemmed specifically by demanding it as a given right, should the people become dissatisfied with their government. Free speech reign because it, above all else, keeps us free.

I try to keep in mind, when encountering differing opinions from my own, that it is always preferable to listen—I may either strengthen my own opinion, find that the other has good points to make, or find someplace in between the auxiliary opinion and my own. Information is not, and should not be perceived as, frightening. Listening only to our own definitions defies American logic. This is, of course, an America long matured (or long after, at least) the original Constitution, but if it had to be built from the ground up again, and had to be effective, I do not think it would be written very differently.

I posit that there is no system of thought that works better without diversity than with it. Unpopular opinion has the ability to be beneficial, and even if it’s not beneficial, without the ability to voice it there is little chance the beneficial opinion could be discovered. We do not have the foresight (or the right) to know which opinions deserve the public stage and which should just get out of the country. We do not have the knowledge to justifiably and epistemologically assume that our opinions are the only ones worth hearing. I’d rather welcome diversity (of all types) into the fray. To me there is nothing more American.