A Brief Peek Into the Absurdity of “Both-Sidism”

I hear a lot of folks talking about both side-ism these days. I’m not sure I understand why anyone would want to do such a silly thing, but I guess there’s no accounting for taste. I suspect that a big part of the reason for that kind of thinking is the language we use itself. Have you ever noticed that the way we speak is based on equal opposites?

You know, if I say black you’d respond with white. If you say mother I’d reply with father. Up — down. In — out. Back — forth. Here — there. Work — play. Good — bad. Right — wrong. Wet — dry. Coke — Pepsi. Hot — cold. Salt — pepper. The list goes on a long way. But there’s really not any pairing in the list in which the items are actually the opposites. There isn’t any “both-sides” about these things. They merely demonstrate how we talk. Our semantics, if you will.

Salt and pepper are condiments but they’re not the opposite of one another. All of these pairings could be considered as relatable differences. Salt and pepper can not be compared because they do not have the same function. Salt does something different than does pepper. There are comparisons which are relative. Dark is relative to light. Dry is relative to wet. Up is relative to down. Work is relative to play. And so on. But these things are positions on a scale. They are not opposites and they do not have two sides. They can be compared, but along a sliding scale.

There can not ever be two sides to much of anything other than a coin. However, for something to actually have two sides which can be observed and compared, it has to be of three-dimensional substance. Not abstract feely kinds of attributes which are substance free. Abstract feely has nothing to observe or compare because it lacks substance.

Take good and bad as another example. We all know people who decide they get a “vibe” from someone and decide from that feeling that the person is possessed of qualities that may not actually exist in that person, but that wouldn’t keep us from labeling that person as good or bad. The problem is those terms are relative to an invisible scale. That scale exists in how you or I feel about dress, skin color, accent, vocabulary, morality in general, moral action in particular, and most likely, although there’s been no peer review, whether there’s evidence of maturity.

An example of feelings about something that is pure fantasy is Jimmy from Ohio looking for something to use to impeach Biden. They’ve looked and looked and ain’t found a thing. But, they feel like there must be something. We know what Jimmy feels, too. He feels like his MAGA world is about to collapse around his ears. But he would not dare to call it that because how he feels is more important than reality. Besides, his Dark Lord has ordered him to do the deed. Kevin doesn’t have a choice because of what he feels for Marjory. None of this can be compared to another side because there is no other side.

Now, something to remember is that you have to be able to compare a thing. That thing has to have real and observable aspects in order to have two sides which can be compared. In other words, you can observe one side and then turn a coin over to observe the other side. Both sides are real.

Now, let’s take a look at a popular two-sides issue on cable news. Two presidential contenders. Biden and Trump. There is nothing to compare. Trump is in a fantasy about how wonderful he is and how the election was stolen. None of that is actually real. He may be a legend in his own mind but that’s, by definition, a fantasy.

Biden is building bridges and making broadband available to the whole nation. He has negotiated lower drug prices. That’s real. Biden’s actions speak louder than his words. Trump spins fever fantasies about that good man to assuage his personal guilt for his spoiled and immature misdeeds. There is nothing to compare. Trump only touts an “alternative reality.” The problem is it ain’t real no matter how much he tells himself that he really won the election. But then it may be that he can’t do the reality where the rest of us live. His point of view has very little real about it unless you count smoke and mirrors as real. How can fantasy compare to the Biden point of view? The Biden administration has added more jobs in two years than any other president has added in four years. How’s that for a measure of real?

Trump just does not exist in the same reality as Biden. I’m not necessarily pro-Biden and anti-Trump. I just don’t think Pinocchio can make it as a real boy. How can I be pro or con with that kind of unfortunate story? There really is nothing to compare and because Trump doesn’t show up for the game of real, he loses by default. I can not say that the man is bad. He doesn’t know from real, is all. Maybe he’ll have better luck identifying what is real the next time around. Or, maybe he’ll return as a cow on the streets of some Indian village and none of this will matter. Who knows?

An example of a thing with only one side is the Mountain Laurel epic Beetlejuice extraction. I suppose her escort could have done a both-sides thing, but that wouldn’t have changed the story. This was an example of how a picture is worth a thousand words. There can not possibly be another side to that video. No matter what explanation is offered, there is only one side to that event.

I think the part of the both-sides kind of presentation which is most bothersome is after the boots-on-the-ground reporter makes the required eye witness report on side one and the other reporter makes the second eye witness report. The shot then goes back to the studio for a both-sides discussion. How does anyone report a both-sides story when one of the sides is pure fantasy? I don’t know if anyone is really affected by any of this both-sidedness and I suppose it might be hard to have to invent a tension that holds an audience for more than a news cycle. I can’t say that both-siding an issue is wrong and it could be good business.

I can see how Marjory being crass is a crowd-pleasing story. No one can believe how off the wall she is most of the time, so people are going to read or listen to anything about her political persona. But, she does not have the bonafides to hold positions of authority in the government. But then, neither did Trump. The news people loved him because he meant ratings, the same as Marjory or that Colorado cultural giant being groped for the next Congressional pin up calendar.

The danger in this both-sides stuff is that there are people who do not follow political intrigue all that well. When they get a cup of coffee down at the Do Drop Inn, they hear everyone they know talking about what is in essence a fantasy, touted by someone who knows better, but touts it for the party’s benefit. No one down at the Do Drop has a chance of making an informed decision because there is no information to consider. There is no relative comparative possible unless both sides of the comparison are substantive and, believe this or not, real.

If you’d like to support John (and any other writer on Medium!), the best way to do so is to engage with this blog. Claps, highlights and comments are the best way to tell Medium that you want to see more of what John writes and help get his blog in front of more people. And if you haven’t already become a Medium member, joining gives you the opportunity to access all of John’s blogs, as well as thousands of other writers on the platform.

Thanks for reading, and John would love to hear your thoughts! Comment below, let’s start a discussion.