Does character still matter in politics?

[ceeboo]

The point of my participation in this thread is clear. I suggested that the thread is damaging to relationships, Americans, and widens an already wide divide amongst the people. I suggested it because it's true.

What was your point to participate in this thread?

I don't think titles of threads are damaging relationships.

Like I already said in the thread, I think they contribute to the damage/division.

I want to see if I'm understanding you: If there were countless articles, news outlets, message board threads, etc - that cemented negative labels upon all individual members within a wide and diverse group (Nazi, Racist, Karl Marx fan, Radical leftist, Hitler, terrorist, Cult member, Moron, Communist, Stupid, Trump lover, Xenophobe, Homophobe, etc) are you saying that this does not have a damaging/divisive effect on America/Americans/relationships between fellow Americans?

We are a nation founded on ideas rather than shared genes or religion.

Yep.

[honorentheos]

I don't think titles of threads are damaging relationships.

Like I already said in the thread, I think they contribute to the damage/division.

I want to see if I'm understanding you: If there were countless articles, news outlets, message board threads, etc - that cemented negative labels upon all individual members within a wide and diverse group (Nazi, Racist, Karl Marx fan, Radical leftist, Hitler, terrorist, Cult member, Moron, Communist, Stupid, Trump lover, Xenophobe, Homophobe, etc) are you saying that this does not have a damaging/divisive effect on America/Americans/relationships between fellow Americans?

I'm saying what matters isn't the labeling, it is the facts and discussion that engage why folks use those labels to shorthand the political discourse that is what actually replaces the shorthand with something more healthy. If you are sincere in wanting to disrupt that shorthand process, the solution is to engage in ideas not attempt to plug a leak with your thumb while having a side you clearly favor but won't defend on their own merits. It's not being a good person to show up on the board and express feeling bad for Biden as an old man who should have stayed home in a comfy chair under a blanket. That's pandering. It's just a different kind of shorthand that is basically no different than the title of a topic. So, if you care enough then turn that into civil discourse instead. Engage in longer form debate, share facts that support your views, connect your values to outcomes that you feel are represented politically somehow or other.

We are a nation founded on ideas rather than shared genes or religion.

Yep.

Cool.

[ceeboo]

There is an interesting book that came out in the early 2010s that comes to mind here, ceebs. Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He also wrote Black Swans which some folks here may have read or heard of.

At its most basic, it's about systems that gain resiliency from stress compared to systems that break under stress. And one concern discussed is the idea of intervention leading to a build up of stresses that become so great when they finally do overcome the system it leads to catastrophy.

Socially, it includes the urge some folks feel to avoid having important discussions in order to play nice. While probably good intentioned, the avoidance of the actual issues isn't leading to a stronger system. Instead, it's attempting to dam up the stressors and keep them from leaking out. As the dam holds back more and more unaddressed conflict points, the potential energy climbs until the energy required to hold it all back can't be sustained and the dam bursts.

Interesting - Thanks for sharing.

The system needs healthy debate, not avoidance.

I'm not seeing this flavor of debate anywhere. Are you?

[honorentheos]

There is an interesting book that came out in the early 2010s that comes to mind here, ceebs. Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He also wrote Black Swans which some folks here may have read or heard of.

At its most basic, it's about systems that gain resiliency from stress compared to systems that break under stress. And one concern discussed is the idea of intervention leading to a build up of stresses that become so great when they finally do overcome the system it leads to catastrophy.

Socially, it includes the urge some folks feel to avoid having important discussions in order to play nice. While probably good intentioned, the avoidance of the actual issues isn't leading to a stronger system. Instead, it's attempting to dam up the stressors and keep them from leaking out. As the dam holds back more and more unaddressed conflict points, the potential energy climbs until the energy required to hold it all back can't be sustained and the dam bursts.

Interesting - Thanks for sharing.

The system needs healthy debate, not avoidance.

I'm not seeing this flavor of debate anywhere. Are you?

Actually, yes. I think much of it happens in formats outside of cable news and off the debate stage. It requires engaging in critical thinking and research. You don't find it on social media and it isn't usually polite if that's what you are expecting. But polite does not also equal healthy per se. The most sincere folks care about their views. What they can be is civil if harsh towards opposing views.

I suggest checking out the discussions at the end of the PBS News hour as a place you can start. It used to be a dialog between Mark Shields and David Brooks before Shields retired in late 2020 and since passed away.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgaw ... 8iKg5tnXFS

[ceeboo]

Like I already said in the thread, I think they contribute to the damage/division.

I want to see if I'm understanding you: If there were countless articles, news outlets, message board threads, etc - that cemented negative labels upon all individual members within a wide and diverse group (Nazi, Racist, Karl Marx fan, Radical leftist, Hitler, terrorist, Cult member, Moron, Communist, Stupid, Trump lover, Xenophobe, Homophobe, etc) are you saying that this does not have a damaging/divisive effect on America/Americans/relationships between fellow Americans?

I'm saying what matters isn't the labeling, it is the facts and discussion that engage why folks use those labels to shorthand the political discourse that is what actually replaces the shorthand with something more healthy.

I am sure it's due to limitations on my end, but I am struggling to capture what you're saying.

Let me make it simple: Does cementing a negative label upon millions of people, like racist, damaging to America and/or relationships amongst Americans? Is it divisive?

If you are sincere in wanting to disrupt that shorthand process,

Sincere? I am not even interested in disrupting that "shorthand process" (whatever that is?). I made a post challenging someone I consider a friend. I have passed on countless other examples here that were much worse.

Engage in longer form debate, share facts that support your views, connect your values to outcomes that you feel are represented politically somehow or other.

Here? No thanks.

[ceeboo]

Interesting - Thanks for sharing.


I'm not seeing this flavor of debate anywhere. Are you?

Actually, yes. I think much of it happens in formats outside of cable news and off the debate stage. It requires engaging in critical thinking and research. You don't find it on social media and it isn't usually polite if that's what you are expecting. But polite does not also equal healthy per se. The most sincere folks care about their views. What they can be is civil if harsh towards opposing views.

I suggest checking out the discussions at the end of the PBS News hour as a place you can start. It used to be a dialog between Mark Shields and David Brooks before Shields retired in late 2020 and since passed away.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgaw ... 8iKg5tnXFS

Hmm. Thanks - Maybe I will check that out.

[Kishkumen]

I am very sorry, ceeboo. I feel like I let you down. Thanks for popping in to give me a healthy call to reflect on what I am doing.

[honorentheos]

I'm saying what matters isn't the labeling, it is the facts and discussion that engage why folks use those labels to shorthand the political discourse that is what actually replaces the shorthand with something more healthy.

I am sure it's due to limitations on my end, but I am struggling to capture what you're saying.

Let me make it simple: Does cementing a negative label upon millions of people, like racist, damaging to America and/or relationships amongst Americans? Is it divisive?

Ceebs, you aren't willing to engage in even attempting civil discourse here and can barely disguise the disgust in your comments about the board.

Please. If you don't like being painted by that brush, step to the side. The Republican party has absolutely given itself over to forces intent on destroying democracy. It's not a game and it's not about your feelings. The facts matter. Engage them if you want and actually care. Or don't pretend it's about anything more than your feelings being hurt but won't do anything yourself to consider or address the actual reality of what's going on here.

[ceeboo]

I am very sorry, ceeboo. I feel like I let you down.

Absolutely no need to apologize. Given the countless kind, informative, and positive contributions you have made to this board over many years (and that I have benefited by reading), you have not let me down. Not a chance!

Thanks for popping in to give me a healthy call to reflect on what I am doing.

I did it because it was you - and I thought I could do so with the often overlooked but very valuable benefit of doubt firmly available to me. I would hope that you know, should you want to challenge me in any way, you have the same benefit.

I have been a kish fan for many years, and I remain a fan. No worries!

[ceeboo]

I am sure it's due to limitations on my end, but I am struggling to capture what you're saying.

Let me make it simple: Does cementing a negative label upon millions of people, like racist, damaging to America and/or relationships amongst Americans? Is it divisive?

Ceebs, you aren't willing to engage in even attempting civil discourse here and can barely disguise the disgust in your comments about the board.

Honestly, I didn't think I was trying to disguise anything. I thought I have been pretty clear.

Please. If you don't like being painted by that brush, step to the side.

I will post what I want - when I want. And to who I want. That's how I roll.

The Republican party has absolutely given itself over to forces intent on destroying democracy.

I have heard.

It's not a game and it's not about your feelings.

My feelings have nothing to do with my posts in this thread - I made posts about reality.

The facts matter.

I know, that's why my first post in the thread - followed by my other posts in this thread, are factual.

Or don't pretend it's about anything more than your feelings being hurt but won't do anything yourself to consider or address the actual reality of what's going on here.

I did do something - I made a post challenging kish that addresses the actual reality of what's going on here. My feelings had/have no part in it.

But you didn't answer my question. Here it is again in case you just happened to miss it.

Let me make it simple: Does cementing a negative label upon millions of people, like racist, damaging to America and/or relationships amongst Americans? Is it divisive?