I've always been relatively low-key when it comes to politics. I have convictions as strong as anyone else, but I usually opt to present them only in the most appropriate of situations. Political discussions are inherently divisive in America, and disagreements on emotional issues often sour relationships. The most controversial topics seem so fundamental and moral to people on either side of the equation, thus it's hard for someone not to interpret disagreement as ignorance or inhumanity. Without an established sense of mutual trust and respect, it's always been a losing game to me.
While we have plenty of gray area, our culture is mostly categorized by
two major belief systems. If anything, that oversimplification is part
of the problem. Almost anyone with internet access has seen exchanges between individuals in which the words "liberal" and "conservative" are tossed back and forth like schoolyard taunts. Amazingly, the information era has allowed this plague to reach middle-school age children. When I was in seventh grade, we called each other all sorts of names but I don't ever remember kids taunting each other for their stance on abortion. Now it's not unusual to see a video featuring Hillary Clinton peppered with inscrutable, profane insults I used to see playing online shooter games. Sometimes in lieu of profanity, people might simply say "she's a liberal feminist" as if it were a phrase of oppression.
Sadly, these exchanges aren't limited to preteens in the YouTube comments section. I've seen the very same taunting and name calling from political pundits on news segments. It's even become the main feature of presidential campaigns, which was never more apparent than in 2016. It's shocking to think that speeches and debates are supposed to be platforms to communicate important ideas, yet they've been reduced to such anti-intellectual soap operas in which very few actual ideas are being communicated. And though it's something of a signature for major conservative figures, both Republicans and Democrats are guilty of this trend. It's just a function of today's entertainment-fueled political process.
It's admirable to be outspoken about your beliefs. It's usually a sign of passion and character. Furthermore, ideas must be communicated bluntly for any real discussions to follow. However, strong expression in any category seldom produces the reactions expected of listeners. I've observed very few instances of someone completely changing the opinion of another by aggressively approaching a topic. It makes sense, in a way. You're more likely to hear someone if they are speaking rather than shouting. There must be a psychological dynamic at play, one which blocks incoming messages if they're being communicated in an incendiary manner.
It boils down to whether the message is being communicated in a positive or negative manner. More specifically, I think a message being communicated in an outspoken manner tends to verge more on the negative. The speaker sees an injustice and attempts to point it out by focusing on what is wrong, usually by pointing out a flaw or ignorance in the audience. Whether or not it's a correct observation, most people generally won't respond to a challenge of character by admitting that they've been wrong. I think it's more likely to produce feelings of opposition, in a sort of defense.
The second approach, which I've found to be more effective is more low key in nature. I liken it to the "answer only when asked" proverb. Some might say it's not as venerable or honest as being outspoken, but I think it's a much more effective way to communicate ideas. I've been constantly chastised by more outspoken friends for not doing my part to highlight the "wrong" opinions I observe in my friends and family every day. As a socially liberal person, one might be shocked to see how many connections I have who are more conservative, or downright prejudice. One might ask why I haven't yet axed these connections if they hold immoral or ignorant viewpoints.
Well, truthfully very few people ask me that because it's a stupid question. I posed it myself for the sake of rhetoric. We all have "bad apples" in our social batches, no matter who we are or what we believe in. I haven't broken those connections, because it's hypocritical to profess myself a supporter of change and tolerance when I'm engaging in the opposite. If we aren't trying to change the minds of the "ignorant", whose minds do we have left to change? Of course while I relish variety and a healthy difference of opinion, I would like to see more unity out there in the world, one way or another. The question is, how do we find that unity?
I look at my friends with the strongest opposing opinions to mine and realize that we obviously didn't bond over our beliefs. In most cases, they tend to be people with whom I had a friendly, casual connection through avenues like high school or having mutual friends. When our opinions eventually arose, they didn't divide us, for we'd already established a firm sense of mutual respect and understanding. If anything, we'd made progress and learned from each other. With every one of those connections, I learn not to demonize or generalize social conservatives. In turn, they have the chance to truly see a minority as a person and not a demographic. That in itself is more progress than I could have ever made by starting off our friendship with a debate on political correctness.
Watching our current sociopolitical climate become ever more divisive, this is something I think about every day. Considering how our differences are even leading to violent confrontations, it makes me wonder if perhaps all of this tension will come to a radical conclusion. It's been well over a century since our last civil war, though the civil rights movement of the 1960's certainly made more than a few people wonder whether or not we were headed toward the same path. Are we due for another war, a progressive revolution or both? Of course I'd prefer the narrative where everyone just mellows out out and bonds over the most inane activities. Until then, I'll enjoy the soap opera Twitter war that is the 2016 presidential elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment