A Political Position Is a Frame, Not the Whole Field

Politics requires positions.

Votes, laws, budgets, treaties, regulations, and public decisions eventually require choosing among alternatives.

Having a position is not the problem.

Confusing the position with the whole field is.

Every political position emphasizes some facts, values, risks, time horizons, constituencies, and tradeoffs more than others.

That does not make all positions equally supported by evidence.

It does mean the position is a frame through which the problem is being organized.

A useful political conversation can therefore ask two questions at once.

What position do I currently support?

What does this position make easier to see, and what might it make easier to ignore?

The second question is not an argument for centrism, neutrality, or indecision.

A person can hold strong political commitments and still examine the frame around them.

Democratic disagreement becomes more workable when opponents are not required to pretend they have no position.

The goal is not positionlessness.

It is enough distance from our own position to see that the problem is larger than the view from where we stand.