Meta-level discussion is never intended to “rise above” ground-level politics—that is indeed an illusion as you say. Rather, it’s intended to side-step the former temporarily, while still being useful by creating better frameworks for deliberation, mediation and similar good practices. It’s very important to understand this—any talk of “rising above” the actual, real-world issues is illusory and potentially dangerous.
Rather, it’s intended to side-step the former temporarily, while still being useful by creating better frameworks for deliberation, mediation and similar good practices
The problem is that it’s frequently used as an attempt to reach conclusions while side-stepping the whole messy “looking at the facts on the ground” thing.
Meta-level discussion is never intended to “rise above” ground-level politics—that is indeed an illusion as you say. Rather, it’s intended to side-step the former temporarily, while still being useful by creating better frameworks for deliberation, mediation and similar good practices. It’s very important to understand this—any talk of “rising above” the actual, real-world issues is illusory and potentially dangerous.
The problem is that it’s frequently used as an attempt to reach conclusions while side-stepping the whole messy “looking at the facts on the ground” thing.