In Part 1, we briefly examined the prevalence of false alternatives in controversial political issues. But how do we know when false alternatives are being presented? How do we know that there are other alternatives?
The clearest indication is when we actually know of real alternatives. If we are aware of an alternative that isn’t being discussed, then it is clear that we are being presented false alternatives. Unfortunately, we are not always aware of real alternatives. However, there are a number of clues that we can look for.
One of the strongest clues is the goal that underlies the discussion. When the well-being of the group—such as the community, the race, the religion, or the nation—is the goal, then it is highly likely that false alternatives are being presented. When a policy is defended because it will promote the “public interest,” the community’s values, or the “common good,” the supposed interests group serves as the goal.
If the group’s interests serve as the goal, then alternatives that promote and enable individual flourishing are typically ignored. For example, in debates over Christian bakers who refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple, the focus is on two different groups—Christians and gays. The group is what matters most, and the debate focuses on which group should predominate. The real alternative—the rights of the individual—is ignored in the debate over false alternatives.
Another clue is imprecise or ambiguous language. This can be difficult to identify, because it often involves terms that we frequently hear, and those terms seem to have positive meanings. But what do terms like community values, quality of life, or protecting our heritage really mean? They might sound good, but before we accept and act on them, we must be clear what they really mean.
Invariably, these terms are a mask. They are used to promote the group as the standard of value. They are used to cajole the individual to sacrifice his flourishing to the group. They are used to promote the false alternative that we must choose between our individual flourishing and the flourishing of others.
In truth, we can create a culture in which all individuals have the opportunity to flourish. We can create a culture in which individuals can dream and aspire to be the best that they can achieve, and then protect their freedom to do so. A society is the sum of the individuals comprising it. If we want a glorious society, then we must enable individuals to achieve their best. And that means protecting property rights. Read Part 3 of this series.