It is not clear to me that public discourse was less ugly in past years. I am white and affluent and those are powerful filters. I may be more aware of the vitriol that is present now because of technology, and hope that there is a constructive use to that knowledge as a free citizen in a democracy.
I am more aware than ever of politicians (elected officials, candidates, pundits) advocating that we treat each other worse. One of the gifts of the spirit that I feel I have in the face of that advocacy is inertia. As my default position I'm not going to agree to treat other people worse. Others need to convince me why I should and they need to work hard.
By disposition I am pushed away from agreement with advocates who are loud in either volume or intensity of language, for to reward that kind of behavior is to invite cacophony.
I am pushed away from agreement with advocates who talk very fast, stringing together extreme and improbable claims in an attempt to keep me from examining any of them individually. That's not advocacy so much as subliminal instruction.
Lastly if you are on the same side of any issue as folk who advocate violence as a political tool then the default is that you need to distinguish your point of view from theirs before I will begin to try to understand it. To do otherwise is to normalize societal violence.
Comments
Post a Comment