I love people who are capable of taking a side. My fondness for declarative sentences is often misunderstood as a knack for contrarian sparring, but the truth is that the middle ground has always seemed weak. 

Forming an opinion does not necessitate a dogmatic obsession with being right. The lost art of argumentation is contributing to the culture of fence-sitting that allows intellectual laziness to dominate our marketplace of ideas. 

“We want to be aware of particular cognitive biases that we all have that tend to entrench particular views,” said Dan Myers, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota, whose speciality is political psychology. “We’re all motivated to find ways … to think about our existing identities positively and to support those that we already have.” 

Personal bias is unavoidable, making it essential to interrogate those beliefs. Challenging deeply held values strengthens them. By allowing our positions to grow alongside new information, we fortify them against opposing views. 

The expectation to respect “both sides” erodes any sense of right and wrong. Weakening convictions in the name of feigned human decency produces an opposite effect that is rampant in political discourse. 

The most pressing crises of our time have fallen prey to this phenomenon and we are doing a bad job at navigating them as a result. 

Former President Donald Trump brought the issue center-stage when he accused the media of systematically defaming him over the course of his presidency. To quell the outrage around this allegation, these outlets began to publish a wide array of perspectives regardless of their factual legitimacy. 

Ironically, this is not a bid for the Democratic party either. Take for instance the damage incurred by moderate obstructionists Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin. In one fell swoop, the two kneecapped President Joe Biden’s narrow majority by striking down major policy initiatives that were ever so conveniently aligned with their individual interests.

Idiocy aside, Sinema and Manchin underscore the myth of political neutrality. There really is no such thing.

In his 2018 essay, the former head of the Office of Public Service Values and Ethics for the Canadian government Ralph Heintzman wrote about “speaking truth to power” — the exercise of truth-telling as a form of civil service. Heintzman argues in favor of conviction over partisanship, taking an approach to governance that is rooted in candor and trust. This is an obvious (and warranted) fracture in our current dialogue. 

We can repair that trust by leaning into more principled discourse. Not one that demands ideological homogeneity, but rigorous fact-finding. One that encourages an exchange of ideas so long as those ideas are based in the same reality. 

Consider the attack on academic freedom emerging in conservative states. These bills are taking hold of classrooms across the country, effectively molding what is considered “truth,” despite the fact that it runs in direct conflict with well-documented reconstructions of colonial history. By engaging in these conversations beyond outright rejection of their ideas, they become legitimized despite their lack of evidence. Appeasing this baseless clamoring produces real harm. 

Respect for ideas is earned through diligent debate — not by sitting on the fence. No one ideology has a monopoly on truth, but there is such a thing as right and wrong, fact and fiction. Defining those differences is an ongoing process of discovery but not an excuse to accept problematic dog whistles that perpetuate systems of oppression. 

“Try to develop at least an understanding of the rationale that someone who disagrees with you holds,” Myers said. “Understanding is still a useful thing, even if only to find ways to better disagree with it.” 

Becoming more principled in our beliefs in an attempt to speak truth to power is absolutely critical on our often sinking ship. Taking a side isn’t shutting out the other. In fact, it actually creates a more serious and productive exploration of tough concepts.