Our democracy benefits when people engage in open-minded discourse, sharing opinions and beliefs as long as the conversations are intellectual, not emotional. And I’m not using the Conservative’s Elitist definition of intellectual here; I’m using intellectual in the sense of intelligence and critical or analytical thinking. But, all parties do have to check their Glocks with the sheriff before entering the debate.
Unfortunately though, some politically inclined folk prefer to get their daily dose of politics from like-minded people or paid-for-performance pundits. Pundits whose next raise or promotion or book deal depends on getting you all wound up and wobbly. In a sense, politics has become a business in its own right. A non-secular business at that. Pay-per-view in the truest sense.
The airwaves, blogosphere and print media are full of self serving, ranting and raving ideologues whose primary purpose is to foment anger and outrage in whatever segment of the electorate they are currently working. And each segment, for its part, seldom investigates the ideologue’s motives (usually money and fame) or the so-called facts supporting his or her claims.
Ideologues, especially the paid-for-performance ideologues, seldom employ intellectual reasoning, preferring instead to appeal to the emotions of their audience; using the very same tactics employed by every despicable despotic leader since the beginning of time. Which means, of course, that it works. Which means, of course, we haven’t yet evolved enough to question obviously half-baked ‘truths’, truths that could easily be debunked by the average non-partisan 2nd grader with access to the Internet. Shame on us.
Consider too, that we actually encourage those ideologues when we tacitly agree only to listen and never question what we’ve heard.
You’ve surely heard of signing loyalty oaths as a precondition to entry at a rally or organization. Those oaths are almost like the oath demanded by a pedophile of his prey: “Don’t tell your mommy or daddy or Uncle Joe, because they won’t understand, they’re not like us”. And yes, I am likening certain pundits to disgusting pedophiles with the minor difference being that their mass audience approach raises them to the level of Glorified Cluster Groper where all the gropees are required to chant in unison: “Wow, that felt good-----didn’t it-----?”
So, why don’t we engage in polite political discourse: sharing ideas, opinions, and beliefs? Is it really improper? Do we fear losing friends? Do we fear new ideas? Do we fear having our minds changed? Are we afraid that we don’t have all the facts and might seem ill informed? Are we afraid to learn by making mistakes? Or is it just easier to let someone else do the thinking, leaving to us the heady tasks of twirling batons, waving pom-poms and reloading our Glocks? How can we, without perturbation, select leaders who will certainly shape our mores if we can’t or won’t discuss the options in polite conversation? Have we abdicated our responsibility, or are we just lazy and afraid? Do we not know how to be polite and still make a point? Has civility left the room?
Personally, I think discussing politics can be titillating and profitable and enlightening as well as educational, and if that costs me a friend, well maybe he or she wasn’t really a friend to begin with.
