What Is Unity, Anyways?

“Without some clarification on this point, calling for unity looks less like an appeal to historical precedent and more like the nostalgic projection of order and stability onto time periods that were anything but.”

Introduction

This year, thus far, has been replete with calls for unity from many places across the political spectrum. Ben Shapiro’s new book How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps opens with a lament for shared American values; calls for their rejuvenation; and, of course, blames the Left for everything that has gone wrong in the United States. When he is not stoking the fires of partisan antagonism or playing the victim, President Donald Trump occasionally makes similar claims. Op-ed after op-ed mourns hyper-partisanship and “fragmentation.” The unstated implication of these pieces is that once upon a time there was a firmer sense of togetherness and conviction that—appropriately—united the United States and, by extension, the ambiguously defined Western world. Now that that has fallen apart, there seems to be little more to do than cite Yeats’ 1920 poem “The Second Coming”:

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”

The Problems With Unity

One of the challenges associated with unity is specifying when—if ever—things were especially unified. Was it during the Obama years, when Republicans swore to do everything they could to block the Democrats’ agenda? Was there unity in the early 2000’s, when schisms over the War on Terror only calmed down when the Great Recession hit? Was it through the dramas of the Clinton impeachment? Were the 1960’s remarkable for their harmony? Without some clarification on this point, calling for unity looks less like an appeal to historical precedent and more like the nostalgic projection of order and stability onto time periods that were anything but. In a sense, we do not allow the past the dignity of being recollected as a truly human time: when free individuals like ourselves struggled and fought for what mattered to them. The appeal of the past becomes precisely its static quality. The fact that it is inalterable (and can only speak through us) leads many to prefer ruminating on the supposed unity of the historical past rather than dealing authentically with the messy complications of life as lived in the present and towards the future.