One 'tell' for left-hemisphere capture

I have been pondering the reaction, especially amongst my clergy friends, to Bishop Budde's sermon the other day (I basically agree with Laudable Practice's take here). I want to tease out a characteristic of that response, and link it to the phenomenon of left-hemisphere capture (LHC) which I have talked about before.

A tell in poker is a behavioural cue or mannerism that reveals information about the hand held by a player (watch Casino Royale for a dramatic presentation of this). What I mean by a tell for LHC is simply a manner of argument or commentary that reveals the presence of LHC. To be precise: the revealing of the presence of LHC is only relevant to the specific discussion being had, this is not a tell of something more universal – that may or may not be present in addition.

The tell has two aspects: where there is discussion of a point, an opposing viewpoint is firstly inconceivable, and secondly immoral. In other words, nobody who is both intelligent and of good-will could disagree with the point. Where there is LHC then there is no room for intelligent disagreement or debate (indeed the entering into debate and seeking of evidence is an indication that LHC is NOT present). The consequence of the presence of LHC in one party – possibly in several parties! - is anger, 'more heat than light'. It precludes reasoned discussion and generates a power struggle. Persuasion leaves and the jackboot marches in.

So with the reaction to the Budde sermon the point made was that it was good to advocate mercy for those who are fearful and may suffer from the actions of the Trump Administration – so far, so good. Yet when criticisms were made, pointing out that Budde had adopted a politically partisan position, many of the reactions from those who supported Budde displayed the tell of LHC. Specifically, there was a tone of incredulity that someone could disagree with her (that's the inconceivable bit) and then there was the more-or-less polite denunciation of those who disagreed (that's the immoral bit). The phenomenon that was not admitted within LHC in this discussion was the existence of a viewpoint that agrees with the call to mercy to the vulnerable but also includes as candidates for mercy those who suffer from uncontrolled immigration. (At some point I'll expand that latter point, all I need to do here is point to it as something which is inconceivable and immoral from within an LHC perspective.)

There are, of course, many examples of this phenomenon, but this particular one – where those who object to immigration are seen as senseless and wicked – is one of the main drivers towards Starmergeddon. To characterise all those who have called for a proper national enquiry into the rape gangs as 'far-right' does not solve any problem. What it does is alienate the majority of the country, generating rage amongst those most affected, and eviscerates the consent of the governed. This is the tragedy of the modern Left.

What is the solution to LHC? How can we ‘show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle’?Prayer, and the humility that comes from prayer. To entertain seriously the thought 'of course I could be wrong' or 'are we the baddies?'. To exercise a little emotional distancing and understand the truth that 'I am not my opinions'. I am pondering the phrase “Only Jesus can save Britain”. I'll write more about that in due course.