#1521 ·
Matthew Booth said:Look, it’s the truth—Ronald Reagan was a master at playing both sides against the middle, bringing everyone to the table. Without both factions working together, there wouldn't even be an America to argue about.
Franjo Harmon didn't achieve that at all. There was no genuine reconciliation here; all he did was attempt to sweep everything under the rug—hoping it would simply get lost in the fog of historical reality. As a historian, he ought to have known he was merely passing the buck to future generations. Perhaps the timing wasn't right back then—though one could argue that wartime and crisis conditions provide the exact opportunity needed—but I find this excessive emphasis on a "reconciliation" that never actually occurred to be problematic. In fact, by constantly preaching this supposed unity, he only deepened the divide. Both sides end up feeling victimized by such a forced "peace," while simultaneously viewing the actions of their own side as entirely justified.