Socratic argument, in fact, is considered bad form. On the surface it might seem that the softness of language we use these days is merely a hyperextension of the civility we are supposedly so short of. But in fact these linguistic evasions serve a liberal agenda, for they cause a kind of rhetorical disarmament that makes effective resistance to nonsense extremely difficult. But if you stand publicly for argument instead of dialogue, for conflict instead of consensus, people who are increasingly conditioned to respond to Happy-Talk will instantly think you are a Bad Person, that you lack compassion and sensitivity . The ascendancy of compassion as a political virtue, along with the soft language of consensus, represent a new turn in our moral life, just as Trilling had identified the rise of sincerity several centuries ago as a brand new moral sensibility.
Conservatives face a difficult task.
Just as liberals consistently underestimated the skill and appeal of Ronald Reagan, it would be a mistake for conservatives to underestimate the seriousness of this profound turn in our moral sensibilities. A way must be found to bridge the compassion gap that doesn't involve becoming Clinton-lite. Otherwise the gap may turn into an abyss, into which the political sense of the country will be swallowed up. Dr. Hayward is an Adjunct Fellow at the Ashbrook Center. The Ashbrook Center is a Member Organization.