(Invite Only) -- What happened to Debate in the USA?

[Sun Devil 92]

If we really have lost that skill, if reason and civility are like muscles - use 'em or lose 'em - this just continues to decay.

I don't think WE'VE lost that skill.. But the media sure has.. And the media DRIVES the conversations in this country.. With both sides dividing up the media into the Left Twix and Right Twix models (must need desert) -- they've REMOVED honesty and objectivity from the national conversation.. So in addition to those "influencers" and role models you're searching for -- we need some of THEM in journalism also to call out right and wrong and bring things back to reality and common sense...

I once read an article by a fellow who decried the fact that people were now almost exclusively sending their kids to be money managers. This fellow taught at a university and he said anthropology, sociology, and other key humanities were being ignored and forgotten at a time when we needed them the most.

Nobody is really looking at how our fast evolving society (with so much technology) is affecting things. Nobody can tell us if "the next best thing" is really a good thing at all.

So I do think we've lost some collective capability of self-evaluation.

One place that it is key is the internet's killing of local papers. Local papers were how you watched your mayor and city hall. But we've lost interest in those mundane things. Many city councils now operate very much under the radar. And in some cases, the operate pretty poorly.

And the internet is no help. For years...I've been countering the "information age" with "the disinformation age" and it is now more evident than ever.

 

[Shelzin]

If we really have lost that skill, if reason and civility are like muscles - use 'em or lose 'em - this just continues to decay.

I don't think WE'VE lost that skill.. But the media sure has.. And the media DRIVES the conversations in this country.. With both sides dividing up the media into the Left Twix and Right Twix models (must need desert) -- they've REMOVED honesty and objectivity from the national conversation.. So in addition to those "influencers" and role models you're searching for -- we need some of THEM in journalism also to call out right and wrong and bring things back to reality and common sense...

I once read an article by a fellow who decried the fact that people were now almost exclusively sending their kids to be money managers. This fellow taught at a university and he said anthropology, sociology, and other key humanities were being ignored and forgotten at a time when we needed them the most.

Nobody is really looking at how our fast evolving society (with so much technology) is affecting things. Nobody can tell us if "the next best thing" is really a good thing at all.

So I do think we've lost some collective capability of self-evaluation.

One place that it is key is the internet's killing of local papers. Local papers were how you watched your mayor and city hall. But we've lost interest in those mundane things. Many city councils now operate very much under the radar. And in some cases, the operate pretty poorly.

And the internet is no help. For years...I've been countering the "information age" with "the disinformation age" and it is now more evident than ever.

*nods* I've given money to SubVerse news as part as a go fund me. Raised over a million to get it going. It's not big, it's not flashy... But it's actual news. I don't know if I'll ever get my money back, or... If it'll stay what it is now. But... Why matters. They're trying.

I bitch about the news. I'm trying to fix it, to make sure I'm not what I tell others they are. I don't want to be a hypocrite.

SCNR

 

[flacaltenn]

That's a better way of expressing this topic.. Pick a thread on USMB. By page 2 it devolves into a bidding war of -- which party did this first? -- or which party did this worse? How do you come into that to point out what's RIGHT and what's WRONG as a mere "independent" thinker? There are no winners if BOTH sides have committed the same sin -- but the current issue is dismissed because "Both sides have done this"... So it's a draw.. Even if it's horribly wrong..

It's not a draw. They are both wrong. Not to go all Vulcan on this, but... That's the long and short of it... Both are correct, in that they are both wrong.

Of course.. If both sides have condoned something evil -- they THINK they are absolved from that evil act every time it's committed... But they aren't -- and we should point that out -- because THEY wont..

To be specific -- think "leaking classified info" or "disregard for safe-guarding" national security info.. Or think using the powers of incumbency to SPY on an opposing campaign during an election.. At the moment this news breaks -- the party under attacks gets it's talking points from the media (usually flawed) about how the party that's charging this offense has done it before..

If you're a rational personal pointing out it's flat out WRONG -- it won't help you make the point since you're marginalized as supporting the accusing party.. But we have to DO that. And no one will remember the next time YOU ARE CONSISTENT and they aren't when the party roles are reversed..

There's the problem.. They've developed a guilt free model of committing and absolving political/societal sins.. They're BOTH guilty.. In Intel terms, THEY ARE ALL COMPROMISED.. And personally I believe the entire D.C. establishment is severely compromised because they've been sinning non-stop for so long...

 

[flacaltenn]

Many times people will say....in the end we all want the same thing. I don't agree with that. Do you think that is true.

Nope.. We don't.. Couldn't even agree on what's for dinner or who's invited.. We DONT all want the same things. Well at least not ALL of them.. And compromises and bipartisanship just end up with 1/2 the solution at 2 times the cost... I GUESS that's the optimum for a representative democracy.. Which WORKED in the past BECAUSE we weren't so divided.

Personally, I think govt is WAAAAY too important in our lives today.. And the expectations for performance are kinda silly given the reality of govt produces lately.. This is REALLY a person to person kind of resolution that needs to happen.. Kinda like the culture/mind shifts in the 60s on civil rights and inclusiveness...

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Many times people will say....in the end we all want the same thing. I don't agree with that. Do you think that is true.

Nope.. We don't.. Couldn't even agree on what's for dinner or who's invited.. We DONT all want the same things. Well at least not ALL of them.. And compromises and bipartisanship just end up with 1/2 the solution at 2 times the cost... I GUESS that's the optimum for a representative democracy.. Which WORKED in the past BECAUSE we weren't so divided.

Personally, I think govt is WAAAAY too important in our lives today.. And the expectations for performance are kinda silly given the reality of govt produces lately.. This is REALLY a person to person kind of resolution that needs to happen.. Kinda like the culture/mind shifts in the 60s on civil rights and inclusiveness...

O.K.

We don't all want the same things.

I would say that is part of the problem statement.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Personally, I think govt is WAAAAY too important in our lives today.. And the expectations for performance are kinda silly given the reality of govt produces lately.. This is REALLY a person to person kind of resolution that needs to happen.. Kinda like the culture/mind shifts in the 60s on civil rights and inclusiveness...

Here is part of the problem to (IMHE) which needs further fleshing out.

What you say govt is too important, I think you (and most folks generally) mean the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

The more local you get the more person-to-person it becomes.

There is only one FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

There are 50 STATE GOVERNMENTS.

There are countless COUNTY and MUNICIPLE GOVERNMENTS.

Hmmmmm.............

No choice vs 50 choices. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

 

[flacaltenn]

Many times people will say....in the end we all want the same thing. I don't agree with that. Do you think that is true.

Nope.. We don't.. Couldn't even agree on what's for dinner or who's invited.. We DONT all want the same things. Well at least not ALL of them.. And compromises and bipartisanship just end up with 1/2 the solution at 2 times the cost... I GUESS that's the optimum for a representative democracy.. Which WORKED in the past BECAUSE we weren't so divided.

Personally, I think govt is WAAAAY too important in our lives today.. And the expectations for performance are kinda silly given the reality of govt produces lately.. This is REALLY a person to person kind of resolution that needs to happen.. Kinda like the culture/mind shifts in the 60s on civil rights and inclusiveness...

O.K.

We don't all want the same things.

I would say that is part of the problem statement.

It's not THAT simple tho.. In terms of making decisions on how we all "get along", we have the freedoms and liberties that ALLOW US to operate (under the law) as we please.. The LESS complicated the law is and the LESS govt makes all those decisions for us -- the less we HAVE to "get along" and the less likely we can GET as polarized as we are now.... Govt can't fix culture.. Too slow, too dumb.. I LOVE multiculturalism for example when it's NOT FORCED on me.. OR I get confused whether wearing a sombrero is a sign of SUPPORT or a "cultural appropriation"..

There ARE some basic truths that can't be violated.. Like -- all people have the right to be RESPECTED and given the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise on an INDIVIDUAL basis.. And judgements should never be made against GROUPS based on individual actions.. All that CURRENTLY getting violated by our candidates for office, the media, social media, and various fringe groups that get way too much attention...

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Many times people will say....in the end we all want the same thing. I don't agree with that. Do you think that is true.

Nope.. We don't.. Couldn't even agree on what's for dinner or who's invited.. We DONT all want the same things. Well at least not ALL of them.. And compromises and bipartisanship just end up with 1/2 the solution at 2 times the cost... I GUESS that's the optimum for a representative democracy.. Which WORKED in the past BECAUSE we weren't so divided.

Personally, I think govt is WAAAAY too important in our lives today.. And the expectations for performance are kinda silly given the reality of govt produces lately.. This is REALLY a person to person kind of resolution that needs to happen.. Kinda like the culture/mind shifts in the 60s on civil rights and inclusiveness...

O.K.

We don't all want the same things.

I would say that is part of the problem statement.

It's not THAT simple tho.. In terms of making decisions on how we all "get along", we have the freedoms and liberties that ALLOW US to operate (under the law) as we please.. The LESS complicated the law is and the LESS govt makes all those decisions for us -- the less we HAVE to "get along" and the less likely we can GET as polarized as we are now.... Govt can't fix culture.. Too slow, too dumb.. I LOVE multiculturalism for example when it's NOT FORCED on me.. OR I get confused whether wearing a sombrero is a sign of SUPPORT or a "cultural appropriation"..

There ARE some basic truths that can't be violated.. Like -- all people have the right to be RESPECTED and given the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise on an INDIVIDUAL basis.. And judgements should never be made against GROUPS based on individual actions.. All that CURRENTLY getting violated by our candidates for office, the media, social media, and various fringe groups that get way too much attention...

You have to acknowledge that simple fact first. You have people who take the attitude that they know whats better for you than you do.....so you should (for you own sake) get on board with their opinion. Drives me crazy.

We all don't want the same thing. We need to state it flat out.

You, once again, are going down the road without the basic premises in place.

Yes, there are basic truths that SHOULD NOT BE VIOLATED WITHOUT CONSEQUENC. You list one you think is an issue.

You then complicate it by bringing in media, social media, etc. Why ?

We should agree to a list of things that should not be violated as we discuss various issues. What the clowns in the media think is of no import to me.

Now, if you say that their message is important....I would say that is part of the problem....we have to much power in the hands of a few people.

 

[flacaltenn]

The more local you get the more person-to-person it becomes.

There is only one FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

There are 50 STATE GOVERNMENTS.

There are countless COUNTY and MUNICIPLE GOVERNMENTS.

Absolutely.. The key to not being divided is to have the ability to make choices at that local level..

IN FACT, most of stuff like criminal justice reform, healthcare, environment, -- REALLY ARE rooted in how that most local/state govt operates and governs. The justice treatment you get, the availability of healthcare, the air/water --- MOSTLY comes from state/local.

We can poke at places like Seattle and Portland all we want -- but millions WANT to live there -- til they dont anymore... LOL...

AND YET -- there's too many threads on USMB about folks worrying about those other 49 states that they DONT live in... And using THEM as examples of how evil the "other side is"... This COVID thingy has just magnified that voyeurism all the hell out of proportion.. With folks arguing about using the same damn Fed restrictions for EVERY state regardless of the situation there. Worry about your OWN state first. Life is less complicated.. Not everybody RUNS the whole country.

I got ripped the other day for mentioning buying fireworks... LOL...

 

[Mac1958]

If we really have lost that skill, if reason and civility are like muscles - use 'em or lose 'em - this just continues to decay.

I don't think WE'VE lost that skill.. But the media sure has.. And the media DRIVES the conversations in this country.. With both sides dividing up the media into the Left Twix and Right Twix models (must need desert) -- they've REMOVED honesty and objectivity from the national conversation.. So in addition to those "influencers" and role models you're searching for -- we need some of THEM in journalism also to call out right and wrong and bring things back to reality and common sense...

Well, I see a lot of it from We the People too. What got me focused on that was speaking to clients and acquaintances in real life. Something struck me.

Swerve to within a MILE of politics, and many will now immediately launch into this angry diatribe of completely one-sided winger (side irrelevant) talking points like they're being interviewed on a freaking TV debate show. Just a seemingly pre-canned string of shallow talking points,

That's when I started getting worried, and it's clear now -- with partisan politics infecting everything from sports to restaurants -- that it's only getting worse.

 

[katsteve2012]

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

Refer to Invite Only Rules posted here ====

Debate Now - Trial for "Invite Only" threads in Structured Debate Forum

We are opening the Invite Only threads in this forum. You may continue to post threads under the OLD structured debate rules OR identify the thread as Invite Only as given in the auxiliary rules below.. READ THEM CAREFULLY. There have been a couple edits since the Announcement of the feature...

www.usmessageboard.com

Invite List Below.
Shelzin
westwall
Sun Devil 92
katsteve2012
Mac1958
NewsVine_Mariyam
WinterBorn
Tom Paine 1949
OldLady
FA_Q2

Welcome to the big experiment.. We designed this optional form of discussion a couple years ago now to create little foxholes for folks to gather from the bigger wars around us.. It's hardly been used.. I'm thinking it's time to create some distance from the raging incitements and partisan clashes and attempt to revive the ability to have discussions. The intent was not EXCLUDE, but to allow smaller groups to have discussions that don't get constantly "photo-bombed" by folks really NOT interested in discussion..

Hope you've seen the Breakfast Club... One of my fav movies of all time.. A bunch of folks from radically different backgrounds and principles get randomly tossed together by the principal and end up having the most HONEST discussions of their lives.. Actually DID change them.. BECAUSE of the honesty and the seclusion of the process. The door is not locked -- you don't have to do detention here. But I'm hoping that at LEAST we have an honest discussion while we're here..

The "list" was my best guess at people I've talked with that are more interested in solutions and principles than they are in "winning" elections.. My HOPE is that this is just first of MANY "detentions" we'll have to WORK on solutions and problem solving instead of constantly suffering shell shock from the din of partisan warfare.,..

So for starters, the obvious problem is how in hell did we lose the ability to rationally discuss issues and problems that are stacking up like an ice jam on a Maine river in March??

Everything is political.. Politics is very hypocritical and dishonest. So when every discussion is DRIVEN by politics, all ya got is hypocrisy, dishonesty and division.. That's expected... But when that dishonesty, hypocrisy and division starts killing your country and making social media a virtual wasteland of shouting and bickering -- what CAN YOU DO???

Media is no help... Elected leaders aren't really a help. They are the generals in this war. From MY foxhole, things are pretty rough and desperate and bringing out the WORST in America... How do we convince people to check their principles and weigh in on THOSE -- rather than their party affiliations?

Staying focused on solutions will obviously be challenging. Far too many in the forum now equate principles with political party affiliation.

So the first question is how do you even begin to talk to people who think that way if their thought process is totally based on who is on "the left or the right"?

Yeah, I sometimes get the feeling that if folks on social media dont match you up as a square or round peg -- they just don't know how to speak anymore... LOL....

In reality, there are no "uniform principles" attached to a party allegiance... Not even for Libertarians as I am.. We bicker a lot amongst ourselves, but DO generally agree on the basics.. Parties that don't EXPECT to win can HAVE principles I guess...

I think most Americans will listen to solution based thinking that isn't the usual Dem/Rep talking point nonsense. After all, the idea is to FIX things, not perpetuate a party in power...

Which is exactly why I have believed in the value of a one party political system since I became old enough to vote. Possibly that could force more Americans to place the country first over party loyalty.

It is human nature to "pick a side" that we think is "better" and defend it, even at a risk of compromising meaningful solutions for the sake of "winning".

 

[flacaltenn]

Swerve to within a MILE of politics, and many will now immediately launch into this angry diatribe of completely one-sided winger (side irrelevant) talking points like they're being interviewed on a freaking TV debate show. Just a seemingly pre-canned string of shallow talking points,

That's when I started getting worried, and it's clear now -- with partisan politics infecting everything from sports to restaurants -- that it's only getting worse.

My OWN BROTHER pulled that crap on me last month.. We USED to be able to talk about anything. He launched off on how Trump was killing people with Covid.. I simply gave him the date that the China ban was made and he went flaming ninja on me..

THAT'S how bad it is... I'll heal up and make amends, but maybe he wont..

This division has been ENGINEERED and WEAPONIZED by the 2 ruling parties.. One only needs to look at a gerrymandering map to see the extent of that engineering.. Gerrymandering has a few GOOD effects, but it's brazenly about marking territory...

I don't WANT to live in a one party state.. But the REALITY IS about 80% of us DO.. I left a TRULY GONE one party state to move to Tennessee where at LEAST the govt is functional and not seeking to ANNIHILATE the minority...

How can we NOT SEE where all this originates? They (the mysterious they) have us wound up about things happening in OTHER STATES that we fight over when it's really not our concern.. BECAUSE even the STATES are marked as targets in this war...

This is why we can't talk to each other any more..

 

[Mac1958]

Swerve to within a MILE of politics, and many will now immediately launch into this angry diatribe of completely one-sided winger (side irrelevant) talking points like they're being interviewed on a freaking TV debate show. Just a seemingly pre-canned string of shallow talking points,

That's when I started getting worried, and it's clear now -- with partisan politics infecting everything from sports to restaurants -- that it's only getting worse.

My OWN BROTHER pulled that crap on me last month.. We USED to be able to talk about anything. He launched off on how Trump was killing people with Covid.. I simply gave him the date that the China ban was made and he went flaming ninja on me..

THAT'S how bad it is... I'll heal up and make amends, but maybe he wont..

This division has been ENGINEERED and WEAPONIZED by the 2 ruling parties.. One only needs to look at a gerrymandering map to see the extent of that engineering.. Gerrymandering has a few GOOD effects, but it's brazenly about marking territory...

I don't WANT to live in a one party state.. But the REALITY IS about 80% of us DO.. I left a TRULY GONE one party state to move to Tennessee where at LEAST the govt is functional and not seeking to ANNIHILATE the minority...

How can we NOT SEE where all this originates? They (the mysterious they) have us wound up about things happening in OTHER STATES that we fight over when it's really not our concern.. BECAUSE even the STATES are marked as targets in this war...

This is why we can't talk to each other any more..

It is, there are people with a vested professional interest in keeping us screaming and not listening, or thinking....

.... however....

....it's still on us to choose to let them win.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Time to use those skills to clean up politics... LOL... Go volunteer for Mac's army of sane people.,..

This made me laugh! I often feel like there’s an army of demons and zombies approaching, and all reasonable people have to man the gates. Many lunatics on USMB use memes to proudly show their dark side. But mainly of course this language is most often used by others characterizing us as barbarians and them as ... “defenders of Western Civilization.”

I once had a nice dream in which I was manning the gates, throwing down stones and boiling oil onto the heads of the poor barbarians. Later somehow I was outside the gates, looking back as the city fell. But what I remember most was a voice — mine or someone else’s — warning that under no circumstances could we break up a Rosetta Stone to throw down on their heads.

Many times people will say....in the end we all want the same thing. I don't agree with that. Do you think that is true.

Others have spoken well on this. But I think in the end it may not matter so much what everybody wants. Too many people want the impossible. Without any idea of what is really happening in the world, what is possible under new conditions, old “wants” are too often feeble, emotional, irresponsible things. Some people “want” to be wizards in a Harry Potter world, to change their sex, while others want a 1950s like MAGA. Neither are possible. The best democratic process and procedures in debate, and having respect for all people and their opinions, doesn’t mean much if our collective assumptions are fundamentally wrong.

Which is exactly why I have believed in the value of a one party political system since I became old enough to vote. Possibly that could force more Americans to place the country first over party loyalty.

It is human nature to "pick a side" that we think is "better" and defend it, even at a risk of compromising meaningful solutions for the sake of "winning".

This is a rather radical and unique thought in our country, and I congratulate you for even imagining it. We all know your idea has roots going back to our nation’s origins, Washington, etc. — though it is usually conceived of as being necessarily “totalitarian” today. It is useful to try to imagine how reasonable, democratic decisions might be arrived at in a one party or non-party system, just as it is to think about fundamental government restructuring. Of course what is just idle, perhaps even frightening, imagining today in America, may one day (if the world is very lucky) turn out to be sensical, practical reform proposals in China.

I don’t have any easy answers to the OP question, “What Happened to Debate in the USA?” But I suspect the answer is probably related to the fact that our country today is not at all the “good old USA” that we all remember, and probably never really was.

 

[flacaltenn]

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

Refer to Invite Only Rules posted here ====

Debate Now - Trial for "Invite Only" threads in Structured Debate Forum

We are opening the Invite Only threads in this forum. You may continue to post threads under the OLD structured debate rules OR identify the thread as Invite Only as given in the auxiliary rules below.. READ THEM CAREFULLY. There have been a couple edits since the Announcement of the feature...

www.usmessageboard.com

Invite List Below.
Shelzin
westwall
Sun Devil 92
katsteve2012
Mac1958
NewsVine_Mariyam
WinterBorn
Tom Paine 1949
OldLady
FA_Q2

Welcome to the big experiment.. We designed this optional form of discussion a couple years ago now to create little foxholes for folks to gather from the bigger wars around us.. It's hardly been used.. I'm thinking it's time to create some distance from the raging incitements and partisan clashes and attempt to revive the ability to have discussions. The intent was not EXCLUDE, but to allow smaller groups to have discussions that don't get constantly "photo-bombed" by folks really NOT interested in discussion..

Hope you've seen the Breakfast Club... One of my fav movies of all time.. A bunch of folks from radically different backgrounds and principles get randomly tossed together by the principal and end up having the most HONEST discussions of their lives.. Actually DID change them.. BECAUSE of the honesty and the seclusion of the process. The door is not locked -- you don't have to do detention here. But I'm hoping that at LEAST we have an honest discussion while we're here..

The "list" was my best guess at people I've talked with that are more interested in solutions and principles than they are in "winning" elections.. My HOPE is that this is just first of MANY "detentions" we'll have to WORK on solutions and problem solving instead of constantly suffering shell shock from the din of partisan warfare.,..

So for starters, the obvious problem is how in hell did we lose the ability to rationally discuss issues and problems that are stacking up like an ice jam on a Maine river in March??

Everything is political.. Politics is very hypocritical and dishonest. So when every discussion is DRIVEN by politics, all ya got is hypocrisy, dishonesty and division.. That's expected... But when that dishonesty, hypocrisy and division starts killing your country and making social media a virtual wasteland of shouting and bickering -- what CAN YOU DO???

Media is no help... Elected leaders aren't really a help. They are the generals in this war. From MY foxhole, things are pretty rough and desperate and bringing out the WORST in America... How do we convince people to check their principles and weigh in on THOSE -- rather than their party affiliations?

Staying focused on solutions will obviously be challenging. Far too many in the forum now equate principles with political party affiliation.

So the first question is how do you even begin to talk to people who think that way if their thought process is totally based on who is on "the left or the right"?

Yeah, I sometimes get the feeling that if folks on social media dont match you up as a square or round peg -- they just don't know how to speak anymore... LOL....

In reality, there are no "uniform principles" attached to a party allegiance... Not even for Libertarians as I am.. We bicker a lot amongst ourselves, but DO generally agree on the basics.. Parties that don't EXPECT to win can HAVE principles I guess...

I think most Americans will listen to solution based thinking that isn't the usual Dem/Rep talking point nonsense. After all, the idea is to FIX things, not perpetuate a party in power...

Which is exactly why I have believed in the value of a one party political system since I became old enough to vote. Possibly that could force more Americans to place the country first over party loyalty.

It is human nature to "pick a side" that we think is "better" and defend it, even at a risk of compromising meaningful solutions for the sake of "winning".

I dont think a one party system is workable.. Because they GOT THERE by engineering a coupe against dissent, and debate.. And you're disenfranchising a large swath of people and leaving them WITHOUT choices on leadership.. Cali is ALREADY there. And that ONE party is CONSOLIDATING their power over elections to effectively BAN competition.. That's why I left there..

Rather have a "coalition" style model with MANY parties coming and going if we had to.. THERE -- your power depends on making allegiances and concessions./deals..

MY preference is simply BYPASS the 2 crumbling, inept, power focused parties and encourage a small group of qualified, problem solving people with people skills to DECLARE as Independents.. Just a FEW of them would WRECK the "gerrymandering' of power that the 2 parties have installed.

These folks could even come from the RANKS of the 2 existing parties.. Because most politicians are muzzled and leashed by their party bosses and NOT happy about being "just show votes".. There are 535 members of Congress and only FOUR party bosses control EVERY MOVE an elected rep makes..

That's a kind of revolution that puts a cork in "vote counts" due to party allegiances.. And I GUARANTEE -- if a current member of Congress decided to became an (I), they would get MORE attention from the media because they would not SOUND like every other Dem or Repub...

 

[flacaltenn]

Others have spoken well on this. But I think in the end it may not matter so much what everybody wants. Too many people want the impossible. Without any idea of what is really happening in the world, what is possible under new conditions, old “wants” are too often feeble, emotional, irresponsible things. Some people “want” to be wizards in a Harry Potter world, to change their sex, while others want a 1950s like MAGA. Neither are possible. The best democratic process and procedures in debate, and having respect for all people and their opinions, doesn’t mean much if our collective assumptions are fundamentally wrong.

That's an important common sense point there Mr "common sense"... LOL... But it should be EASY to show people WHY unworkable things are unworkable.. This is yet another aspect of why people can't civilly debate anymore... Proposals to go "carbon neutral" don't take into account that the US ROLLED BACK it's CO2 emissions to 1990s levels IN SPITE of govt interference to fracking and nat gas... Just that ONE CHANGE had MORE of a dramatic effect on reducing CO2 than 30 years of MASSIVE renewable subsidies and "green initiatives"... Trying to SHOW that there are days when the wind dont blow and the sun dont shine just fall on deaf, uninformed, slightly propagandized ears... For instance..

But you can't send folks with not enough background back to the drawing board to get context and perspective on their unworkable plans because they are POLITICALLY inspired.. Not necessarily solution inspired...

So -- they fester and linger and there are DOZENS of other "zombie" proposals that you can't kill because they are religious ICONS of partisan dogma... Outright BANNING of abortions is yet another example of zombie proposals that heat the anger to glass blowing temperatures...

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I dont think a one party system is workable.. Because they GOT THERE by engineering a coupe against dissent, and debate.. And you're disenfranchising a large swath of people and leaving them WITHOUT choices on leadership..

Oh, I absolutely agree with you here. I don’t think the U.S. needs, or our democracy could tolerate, a one-party dictatorship that suppresses other parties. Heaven forbid!

 

[WinterBorn]

I think the problem is evident on several fronts.

First, the inability to disagree without anger. I remember my parents having friends over in the 1960s. As curious children, my sister and I would eavesdrop on the "grown-up" conversations. There was often disagreement on things. The Vietnam War was one that came up several times. Some of the conversations got a little spirited, but there was no name-calling or hostility. At the end of the evening, everyone was still friends. They shared a lot, and did not always agree. That was the long and short of it.

Second is the news media in this country. When I was growing up, the news was a service provided by the networks. Facts were presented. News stories told as completely as the information allowed. And then came the first 24 hour cable news outlets. Their entire focus was on news. It ceased to be a service and became a business. What news was presented and how it was presented became an income producing product. And, in my opinion, they soon discovered that the public watched the news much more heavily when they were scared. So if the news media scared us, they made more money. Even now the arguments over which media outlet is best is more often based on ratings than on accuracy. Fox News recently argued that one of their news anchors was under no legal obligation to tell the truth. I am sure there are similar sentiments expressed by other media outlets. The idea that we have to fact-check the news outlets is scary. Not to mention unlikely.

The third issue is the popularity of social media. Many of my friends on FaceBook call me "Spoiler" because I call people on inaccurate postings. From Covid-19 nonsense to celebrity deaths to inaccurate news, I will check to verify before I repost something. And I think others should too. At one time doing research to verify something meant, at the very least, a trip to the library. Now, we have vast amounts of information at our fingertips. Whether celebrity died or not can be verified by a quick Google search. But no one bothers.

I also think many, many people want to be cheered on rather than have an actual discussion. They want to speak with people who agree with them and have their views returned in someone else's words. One of the reasons I have always loved to debate is that I learn more about my views when I explain them or defend them.

 

[flacaltenn]

First, the inability to disagree without anger. I remember my parents having friends over in the 1960s. As curious children, my sister and I would eavesdrop on the "grown-up" conversations. There was often disagreement on things. The Vietnam War was one that came up several times. Some of the conversations got a little spirited, but there was no name-calling or hostility. At the end of the evening, everyone was still friends. They shared a lot, and did not always agree. That was the long and short of it.

The anger comes from the pre-existing DIVISIONS that have been drawn.. It's the "We've SEEN the enemy and we will engage the enemy" kinda war mentality.. And folks that aren't in friendly or enemy uniforms just become "collateral damage"..

I remember my Dad's face when we had that Vietnam debate and I brought up the SEATO Treaty and how Vietnam was sliced liked a sandwich by the victors of WW2.. He kind of settled down.. LOL....

Second is the news media in this country. When I was growing up, the news was a service provided by the networks. Facts were presented. News stories told as completely as the information allowed. And then came the first 24 hour cable news outlets. Their entire focus was on news. It ceased to be a service and became a business. What news was presented and how it was presented became an income producing product. And, in my opinion, they soon discovered that the public watched the news much more heavily when they were scared. So if the news media scared us, they made more money. Even now the arguments over which media outlet is best is more often based on ratings than on accuracy. Fox News recently argued that one of their news anchors was under no legal obligation to tell the truth. I am sure there are similar sentiments expressed by other media outlets. The idea that we have to fact-check the news outlets is scary. Not to mention unlikely.

Even more ridiculous is folks that shove "fact checkers" in your face that are PART AND PARCEL of the SAME news orgs that have junked up journalism !!! Only way to survive is to read all sources for possible important stuff and do the fact-checking yourself..

You'd think a degree that basically teaches to do -- who, what, when , where, why -- question answering would be elementary enough to survive political allegiances.. I read a couple Marshall McCluhan books including "The Media is the Message".. Was written about a decade before electronic communications started to explode.. He asserted that more remotely anonymous dialogue would result in severe TRIBALISM of society... Only thing he did not get right was -- there would only be TWO tribes in the war... I think what he had in mind, was that opinions and values would coalesce into a LOT of tribes that developed distrust, misunderstandings, confrontations with the others..

The other thing that McCluhan noted that YOU mentioned about the old "3 network news and a morning paper" era is that the producers of all that KNEW they were guests in your home and KNEW not to PROVOKE you or get you upset.. Or they'd be unwelcomed.. He might have been right about the professionalism and ethics of it -- but obviously a large fraction of the public now LOVE to be provoked and upset IN THEIR OWN HOME by the media IF it supports their political alignment..

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

How do we convince people to check their principles and weigh in on THOSE -- rather than their party affiliations?

Well, I've thought a lot about this, I think the root of this problem, as it is with most, is cultural, and so far I've only settled on a couple of thoughts:

First, nothing of substance can be accomplished unless and until each tribe holds its own accountable for its actions and intellectual dishonesty. I do see some of that on both ends, so there actually is some hope there. There's the Lincoln Project on the Right, and individual progressive pundits like Krystal Ball, Sam Harris and Matt Taibbi on the Left. Just show us some honest, constructive critical thinking and self-reflection, instead of your latest round of childish poo-flinging.

Second, given that we are such a celebrity-driven society, I strongly suspect it's going to take some high-level names on each end to say "enough is enough". Sports? Popular culture? There will have to be several, so that a momentum can be created. And most likely, it will require an important (even catastrophic) event to get the ball rolling. Right now, I don't think we're anywhere near this. And worse, each tribe is waiting for the other to be the adult in the room and make the first move.

My biggest concern is about a question I saw a couple of years ago: Has it been so long since we knew how to communicate properly and effectively that we have literally lost the skill? If that's the case, we're in serious trouble. Obviously the jury is still out. If we really have lost that skill, if reason and civility are like muscles - use 'em or lose 'em - this just continues to decay.

Two things and I really wish that I wasn't beginning our exchange with a disagreement but perhaps I just need more information.

I disagree with the sentiment of tribes and holding their own accountable. Perhaps you can elaborate by what you mean by "tribes" because in my opinion, a signifcant part of the problems we face in society is people trying to regulate and control the behavior of others. It's bad enough that we have elected officials who don't actually represent us, our viewpoints or have concerns for the things that impact us yet pass laws that can diminish our freedoms and we basically get no say so in the matter. I personally have better representation through my professional affiliations that I do from my legislators, although I have communicated with a couple of them in support of specific bills they were attempting to get passed into law in spite of me not being one of their constituents.