Sanity

[sKePTiKal]

Question for everyone who's been interested in this OT topic:

do y'all read stuff from both sides of debate/discussion/disagreement? I'm just wondering if I'm "weird" coz I do. It just seems like it's necessary for me to "try on" what matters to each side to see if it fits with what I'm thinking/feeling myself. I just don't fit neatly into any of the political categories and support specific things on both sides of the shouting... without swallowing all of either sides "platform" or "ideology" whole.

and I did want to recommend a book I read, right after finishing the recent biography of Ben Franklin - Poorer Richard's America. This was written, as if by Franklin - based on what we know about his philosophies, politics, etc. Regardless of where you see yourself politically, there is a lot in this book that is thought-provoking; a different perspective than Left <-> Right, altogether. I think the author clarifies SOME of the issues we face as country and perhaps his suggestions for solutions are useful. I'm not entirely sure I agree with all them, but it's an interesting, quick read in any case.

[Hopalong]

I do, PR, some. But the truth is I've spent more time in the echo chamber.

I get very irritable in the echo chamber though, as I don't feel it's a healthy position. What draws me out is loving people and knowing I learn and benefit from holding the good intention of others, regardless of their views, in high esteem. I am not cynical but my experience with my brother has shown me that not everyone has empathy. I see that in politics as well.

I lack a good education in the long sweep of history. I operate more on intuition, though basic facts are pretty key to me. I really am not chauvinist. I love my country deeply but it's sometimes with the same anguish one feels when one loves an N.
In college I took an independent study on Native Americans and what was done to them. I believe it made a permanent mark on my thinking about nations and nations' own PR about themselves.

Mostly, I don't think there are equivalent political positions, morally. I don't think there's a "this side" and a "that side". I think there are more -- policies and efforts that reflect the Golden Rule, and those that don't.

I also probably underestimate my own ignorance. I have a strong sense that in a hundred years, people will pay as much attention to psychological evaluations of leaders as they do to their talking points. I hope so anyway.

xo
Hops

[teartracks]

Hi PR,

Question for everyone who's been interested in this OT topic:

do y'all read stuff from both sides of debate/discussion/disagreement? I'm just wondering if I'm "weird" coz I do. It just seems like it's necessary for me to "try on" what matters to each side to see if it fits with what I'm thinking/feeling myself. I just don't fit neatly into any of the political categories and support specific things on both sides of the shouting... without swallowing all of either sides "platform" or "ideology" whole.

Yes, I read and listen to stuff from both sides in a random fashion (there's so much said, I don't think it can be approached systematically).  Our thoughts/solutions and those of others are 'just one man's opinion.'   In the current atmosphere, God help us if it triggers the herding instinct!  I don't look at opinions as one size fixes all.  Arguing about it makes about as much sense to me as arguing about which way the toilet paper should roll.  I can't remember hearing anyone's opinion that I'd adopt as a fix all.  I think I have more respect for those who are able to offer their opinions with at least a smathering of humility.

Have been meaning to read Malcolm Gladwell's book, The Tipping Point.   He apparently thinks there are moment's in time, opinions in time that actually change the tide in big ways.  I'd be interested to see if he offers examples of when those tipping points changed things for the good or if they keep getting worse and worse.   

tt

[Hopalong]

Guest...

Your post made me realize I wish I had written

I love my country deeply but I love my planet more.

thanks.

Hops

[CB123]

Hi PR,

I definitely like to read the opposing views on a subject.  Usually, when I am studying something, I am starting out as an amateur on the subject--I dont even know what questions to ask.  Reading someone elses questions and objections allows me to interact with the material from the beginning. 

The other thing I like to do is read about the people who are behind the studies--on both sides.  Where did they go to school, what culture do they come from?  I have learned that there is no such thing as unbiased opinions and knowing a little about the person helps me understand where they are coming from. 

Its impossible to do that for everything I read on a casual basis...some things I just dont care enough to look into that deeply.  Those things are the ones I keep my mouth shut on.  But if I know something, I'll participate in a conversation. 

CB

P.S. I wouldnt identify with much of Colberts politics--dont know anything about his recent shindig, so I wont comment.  But, generally, I think he is hilarious anyway.  I can fall on the floor laughing at people who are really gifted at poking holes in my own philosophies.  And I really appreciate his comments on Capitol Hill about the migrant farm workers. 

[sKePTiKal]

Thanks, everyone! (And a big wave & welcome back to TT!!)

I guess I can relate to just about everything you all mentioned. Historical perspectives, looking behind the "numbers" for the bias (and I'm well versed in how to make them appear to mean something specific - I have a lot of background in "PR"; ironic, isn't it?); and trying to find the questions to ask behind the debates and arguments...

and I think what motivated my original question here, was whether our collective group-mind here might have a different perspective or approach to politics, based on what we've all experienced. I know I can safely say that we're all a tad more sensitive to a perception of unfairness; injustice - whether it's social, environmental, or personal. But I think I can also generalize a tendency on our parts to question how certain we are of our own opinions; the truth in them.

That's interesting to me because it suggests that we might be open, relatively speaking, to new ideas, compromises, and accepting that even "facts" can change, based on the changes in our personal and collective "present moments". We understand about evolution of ideas and perspective... because of our experiences in healing, perhaps. I wonder if that could contribute anything useful in the political arena? It would certainly be a different "voice" than what we've been hearing lately.

Well, so much for pondering - practically speaking, I have to get my butt engaged in the mundane stuff of living again. I guess this is one those things that will roll around in my head while I'm vacumning and caretaking and running errands. All your responses have multiple avenues for further "research". Thanks very much!