Like most bloggers, I go to number of sites: some blogs (like the ones over there), some opinion sites, some boards. What is becoming both increasingly clear and increasingly alarming is the fact that the ability to have even the most basic of discussions is rapidly disappearing.
It is not longer enough to just disagree with a statement or present an opposing view. More and more, responses are at least passively aggressive, if not actively so. This is something I have sort of come to expect on sites that opposing sides are actively "debating" (I use the phrase rather loosely, given the times). What is rather shocking to me is this is now happening on sites and between individuals which in theory are ideologically, culturally, or socially aligned.
I consider myself fortunate - the conversations here remain polite, restrained, and kind, to which I am indebted to you who read and comment. Even if you may disagree with myself or others, you are gracious and observe "the house rules" (so far as I have rules on this site). The thing that surprises me is how less and less true this seems to be out on the InterWeb.
How is that we lost the ability to respond to each other not in anger, rage, sarcasm, or disgust - and not "the opposing side", but the side that one is theoretically on? This is not a silly passive sort of name calling or "You are wrong". This is active and angry responses meant not to communicate information (well, possibly) as much as it is to injure and wound and some feel superior. And again to emphasize, this is from people who theoretical claim they are all on the same side (or at least opposed to the same things).
I am honestly confused as I expected more of people who espouse the virtues of rational thought, data, reason, and (in some cases) Christian charity.
It matters - not just because we lose the ability to discuss things, but that we take the social fabric and rend it even further. That which we despise becomes despicable; that which we loathe becomes loathsome.
That which we hate, becomes hateful.
In C.S. Lewis' book The Great Divorce, Hell is imagined as a dreary gray township under a gray sky which constantly threatens to turn to night. The city is huge but sparsely inhabited. The Narrator (presumably Lewis) asks another individual about it:
""It seems a deuce of a town" I volunteered, "and that's what I can't understand. The parts of it I saw were so empty. Was there once a much larger population?"
"Not at all" said my neighbour. "The trouble is that they're so quarrelsome. As soon as anyone arrives he settles in some place. Before he's been there twenty-four hours he quarrels with his neighbour. Before the week is over he's quarreled so badly that he decides to move. Very likely he finds the next street empty because all the people there have quarreled with their neighbours - and moved. So he settles in. If by any chance the street is full, he goes further. But even if he stays, it makes no odds. He's sure to have another quarrel pretty soon and then he'll move again. Finally he'll move right out to the edge of the town and build a new house."
By losing the ability to talk to each other, even those who in theory share similar views (let alone those we disagree with), we are danger of building our own version of Lewis' Hell.
Yes, speech seems to be very sparse. At work, we talk amongst ourselves, but political season ramps us the silence. Two sides will discuss, while others of different thoughts will just listen in silence. Religion and politics are still the 3rd rail it seems.
ReplyDeleteLast night at restaurant, I saw a family of three together at table, all watching their own personal device. Not a word was spoken, not even a screen shared between the two adults. Strange that.
It is odd to me that if there is any "political" discussion happening, it is usually between two people that agree and everyone else keeps silent. I suspect that people having the discussion think "because we all agree", but I suspect that is not the case.
DeleteThe thing that surprises me more and more is the caustic nature of the discussion between folks that theoretically agree with each other. We - literally - cannot even speak to those we agree with.
Honestly, at times I simply wonder with the phone behavior that you indicate (and I have seen), why people bother to go out anymore. Just call it in. You do not pay for service that way, just the food.
Addiction to the cell phone is so prevalent and deep with so many folks of all ages that I find it disappointing and somewhat humorous at the same time. As to speech with others, I've learned to avoid politics most especially, that topic riles people up mucho más pronto.
ReplyDeleteNylon12, even I struggle with the cell phone. For me, it is best managed by keeping it out of sight and out of reach.
DeleteIt is funny Nylon12 - almost anything riles people up anymore. That is the shocking part.
I too have similar reading habits and have found the same things occurring. I have given up on making any political comment on any of the forums I read as a result. I used to believe blogging was more immune but lately I realize that it is just behind the eight-ball. Earlier this year one blogger asked me to not comment on his blog again when I pointed out a hypocritical instance that occurred in his political party. Another blogger I sometimes make a political comment on will go the route of throwing out everything to see what sticks making it hard to keep to a point that I was trying to make. Fortunately she is more forgiving though and tolerates my occasional comments.
ReplyDeleteWhat I miss the most is that few are willing to know me (or others) long enough to know I poke at both sides. Most of my liberal friends think I'm extremely conservative and most of my conservative friends think I'm extremely liberal when I don't identify with either side. But a few out there have gotten to know this about me and I really treasure those blogs, including yours TB!
Ed - I am in the same position as you: both sides seem to consider me on "the other", because I refuse to hold ideological extremes "just because". Of course sometimes I have to exercise choices - we all do in elections - but that is that is once every two or four years (in the US, anyway).
DeleteA very influential radio host of my youth often said "Never fall in love with a politician - they will break your heart every time". Extend that to every organization, cause, and people (even we as people fail more badly than we desire), and this is the world we live in.
People can (and should) hold opposing views, but those views should be backed by facts and data and be exercised with kindness (this is most important). Without kindness, it simply becomes a shouting match and the Law of The Strong always prevails. As long as this corner of the Interweb remains, it shall not be so here.
Thank you, and you are always welcome here, friend.
It may be coincidence but this seems to have been getting much worse with the advent of "social media" - what I feel is anything but sociable in older terms. So much seems to be driven by the "my picture/comment is better than yours" one-upmanship , and by the comment length restrictions of one particular app that prevent measured discussion.
ReplyDeleteWe cannot put that particular genie back in the bottle, so I don't know where this will end up.
Will - Social Media is a large contributor to be sure, as well as the "Fire and Forget" comment, which is typed off and launch. Sadly, social media has established the ability to be rude and unthinking in one's comments in a way that is not at all acceptable in person (it is now, sadly again).
DeleteYou are right, this does not go back in the bottle. I fear it escalates until no-one comments anywhere on anything. And not talking is not a solution either.
Keeping public discourse civil has long been a challenge - I remember my parents' teaching my brother and me - "Two things you never discuss in public - religion and politics." Easy to keep one's mouth closed - but perhaps social media has removed the barrier of first person embarrassment.
ReplyDeleteDave - One lesson I remember from my parents as well is "Never discuss religion and politics". My material grandparents were one party and Episcopalian, and my paternal grandparents were another party and Southern Baptist. Although I do not specifically remember those conversations, I think they were largely about sports and the grandchildren.
Delete"First Person Embarrassment" - What a novel way to put it. I have to dwell on this more. This is exactly the thing. Thank you.
I concur. Seeing Glenn put out the agony of the fate of little Sammy, and the outright vicious comments were a little startling to me. When I see the blueness of the wound, the obvious weeping from the cut, I try to tread carefully. There is always more damage beneath that can't be seen, but the patient can SURE feel it!!!
ReplyDeletePeople can't handle reality anymore. They live in a self-made cocoon. Whatever pokes into the cocoon is an irritation that has to be removed, sometimes with overwhelming force. I wonder if that is part of the deal with the cell phone epidemic. "THAT is my phone, it's my blanky and my binky, so I can comfort myself. It is my drug of choice. And if I read something that challenges my personal feather-soft reality, I can't handle it!" I tend to see those comments as a temper tantrum.
Relating to GF's predicament, I have been asked to put down animals since I was a kid. When they were too far gone, too torn up to make the trip to the vet, obviously suffering, I was the go to guy. I learned to be compassionate and efficient. For both parties. I guess you learn to be "professional", even though I find it a distasteful job. It's a service, something that few have the constitution or calling to do. I love my animals deeply, but there is a limit in there. Farm kid syndrome, maybe? Only one animal ever felt nearly human to me. So I know I'm way different than the majority are now. Doesn't make me right or better, just different.
I'm not touching Glenn's comment. Folks working evil aren't the same as what happened at the 'box. That was fratricide.
STxAR - Honestly, the comments at Glen's blog were one of the things that prompted this posting. People - long time commenters, some of them - tore into him in a way that a feeding frenzy of piranhas would envy. This from people who are regular readers.
DeleteWe have had to put animals down, and it is never a pleasant thing. That said, there is almost no reason to put an animal down that is unwanted: there are rescues and support groups for almost any kind of animal (yes, I know they are all full of animals people are returning either due to economic reasons or post Plague) and somehow they always find space (I know, I volunteer at one of them). The fact that someone (not Glen) seems intent that this is the only path saddens me beyond belief.
I have been with some of our pets at their passing. It is never pleasant, but at least been able to send them without pain. Sometimes that is all you can do.
I think you and I are "brothers from other mothers" Rynn. I am a farm kid and you can't be squeamish. You need a thick skin and I have that, perhaps too thick, some might think. The guys were probably city kids, their hearts were exactly in the right place, and from their point of reference they made perfect sense. I don't agree with my mom or what she did... but it wasn't my call to make. The boys meant well, although they didn't sound like it. They speak with their hearts.
DeleteI figured as much about the reason for posting. And I agree whole heartedly. The lack of civility is even breaking out among "friends". Not a happy time.
DeleteI wrote about the farm life as that was normal not that long ago. Now pets are children. I missed that memo.
Paul the Apostle was pretty rough on folks in his letters. But his actual presence wasn't so harsh. (IIRC) I wonder if we've always been like this....
Glen - It is not a happy time. You have nothing but my sympathy.
DeleteSTxAR - Civility is that thin layer that keeps civilization together, even when (in theory) we disagree. Lose that, and we..well, we find ourselves where we are.
DeletePets are pretty much like children to many - in fact, they are children to some. I have always been able to draw the line between animals that were pets and animals that were working (or for eating). Pets as children are a luxury item for a society that can afford everything else. I would say I fear that is about to all change, but it already has. At least in our area, shelters of all kinds are completely full as people either give up their Plague animals (they got to keep them from getting lonely) as they want to travel again. Worse yet, abandonment is really becoming a thing.
I'm a bit late to this discussion but my answer to Glenn would be to just listen to them and why they feel the way they do. You don't have to agree with them but you may gain an understanding of why they feel so importantly about the subject which may give you some useful insights. At least this is my method when someone lectures me on a point that I am strongly against. Sometimes I am able to use those reasons for their strong opinions to sway the discussion closer to my view rather than attack their beliefs head on. At the very least, I have used the "whys" of their beliefs to bridge many a divide and have some great friendships with people whom hold opposite beliefs as myself. Being somewhat of a centrist in my views, I find this skill to be vital.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ed. That is what I try to do as well, for a great many of the same reasons you do.
DeleteThe other thing - honestly - is that listening, even without agreeing, gives people some level of dignity. One of the more disturbing and telling things during The Plague was people that mocked one side or or the other - verbalizing in some cases that "they hoped they died" either from taking the vaccine or not taking the vaccine - yet expected these same people to fix their cars, administer medical aid, diagnose their pets, and all of the things that modern society needs to keep it rolling. To somehow effectively wish death on someone while expecting them to serve you is not treating people with respect.