22/11/2005 9:39:54 am
What Is the Public Debate Actually About? Sometimes, the public debate can be quite confusing, partly because of the information intensity. Is it about ideology, about facts or about logic? Very often, the participants in the debate on various matters also have differing opinions about that - which doesn′t really make it less confusing.

Anyway, my point by mentioning this is not only to reveal a certain amount of frustration from a personal desire of structure. It is also to try to point out the actual substance and purpose of a general debate, however trivial such an observation may seem. My conclusion is that most of the discussion is not about actual values or new ideas.

From my perspective, the first line of battle is that of logic. One plus one is two. It is extremely common that people in the debate defy such logic. They can say both that it is very important to make work more profitable and that we should make income tax more progressive. For example. And that is impossible, you can′t have both. Then we get a debate just to explain the logic.

Then, much of the debate is about reality and truth. Is unemployment high or low? Is health care in Sweden good or bad? Does free trade reduce poverty? Does a lower tax pressure give a higher economic growth? And so on. The debate is full of positions about reality and facts. Many of those are factually wrong, which many of those who use them know, but they need to fit reality into their ideological views. Then we have a debate about straightening out the facts.

And when the debaters don′t defy logic and respect the facts, perhaps there are a few lines or seconds left to discuss ideas, issues or ideology. But often, that space is limited indeed. Which is a pity, since that undoubtedly seems as the more creative part of any debate, the part where thought can take new steps forward.