Feb 19, 2020
“145
CEOs Call On Senate To Pass 'Common-sense, Bipartisan' Gun Laws,”
NPR states. “Local Democrat pushes back on NY bail reform law: It's
about 'common sense,' not politics,” a Fox News headline reads.
“The Only Thing More Dangerous Than Trump’s Appeal to Common Sense
Is His Dismissal of It,” The Nation warns. Everywhere we turn we
are told by pundits and politicians that "common sense" demands we
support their preferred policy prescription.
It's
a common appeal: a political issue—whether health-insurance,
immigration, foreign policy, or gun violence—reaches a real or
perceived extreme, and, in reaction, media pundits and political
figures claim the most appropriate response must be ostensibly
neutral, reasonable "common sense" reforms.
But
these claims are insidious. While "common sense" may appear to be a
constructive guiding principle, there is no meaningful definition
of the concept and when it is evoked, it's almost always an appeal
to status quo ideology. What’s sensible to a member of the Tea
Party isn’t the same as what’s sensible to an activist seeking to
end police violence. So, whose “common sense” is really being
promoted when we hear these calls to action?
On
this week's episode, we explore how appeals to “common sense”
present politics as a matter of rationality rather than of
morality; how these demands reinforce centrist and right-wing
ideologies and how the Left can work to build an alternative common
sense.
We are
joined by cultural anthropologist Dr. Kate Crehan, Professor
Emerita at College of Staten Island and the CUNY Graduate
Center.