10/29/04 — 12:05 am CDT

From the extremes, even the middle seems like an opposition.

I wanted to make this first entry about the Electoral college, and how it actually increases everyone's voting power instead of diluting it.  But maybe I should talk about discussion.  I like to think of myself as fairly open-minded and easy-going; deep in my heart I know that there is no problem that thinking human beings can not rationally discuss, and at the very least, agree to disagree.  Unfortunately, I also know that everyone involved has to be willing to do so; otherwise you may as well just tattoo "DOOR MAT" on your head and lie down.  In order to have a discussion, everyone has to be willing to discuss.

Discussion isn't about changing each other's mind in wholesale fashion.  There is no right or wrong in a discussion, only the free exchange of opinion.  Maybe, if we're lucky, we come away from a discussion having learned something that will help us.  Maybe we'll just learn a little something about those with whom we discuss.  I have a few friends with whom I enjoy discussing politics.  Most of them don't agree with me.  Some of them think that my views are insane.  I'm a non-Christian conservative who believes in the decriminilization of moral issues, so i can sort of see their point.  The thing is, is none of us expect to change the others mind completely when we get into one of these discussions.  What we expect is to share what we have, and to gather what the others can give us.

I know a lot of people with whom I can't have any discussion except small talk.  They seem to view any disagreement as a personal affront, and become angry over issues about which I can remain dispassionate.  I see this kind of thing more and more.  I listen to talk radio on occasion, and I hear it there.  Never mind the hate-mongers who spew nationalistic slogans and declare every non-white, non-Christian, or non-English speaker to be in league with the UN and Lucifer Morningstar, they're not germaine to the argument, the right wing has always spawned more than its fair share of jingoists and demogogues.  I'm refering to those hosts who at least try to have a fact-based moderately-driven show.  These hosts seem to drift more and more in one direction or another (okay, more the one direction than the other), and don't even get me started on their callers.  The "conservative voices" that call in to their shows voice a nationalistic paranoia that harkens back to the Red Scare and the HUAC days, and the "liberals" spout Democratic Party talking points and planks as if they had  a quick-reference card on their desks.  And none of them discuss anything...they make broad, unsupported claims and if those are called into question or (gods-forbid) refuted, they interrupt, their voices become louder and shriller with each overbearing interjection, as if conversation were some sort of competition and the one who talks most and loudest wins.

Even on the Web, that shining frontier of free speech and literate discourse sees this kind of non-discussion.  Recently, in his Elf Life blog, Carson Fire wrote a well-thought, perceptive article on the difficulties of having very definite political opinions and trying to keep ones comic relatively free of the influences of those opinions.  In the comments section of that very article one of his readers had announced his* intention to never visit the site or read the comic again because of the blog!  Now I've been all over Mr. Fire's site.  It's oneof my favorite webcomics.  And first, I have to note that Mr. Fire is generally fairly moderate and even-handed in his blog comments, but more importantly, in order for a reader of his comic to become that offended by the blog, he has to want to be offended.  The blog is at the bottom of the page, usually a full browser page below the comic, and Mr Fire clearly marks his political commentaries as such.  But this commenter (who signed off as "Goodbye" with a link to the Politics blog list) claimed that it spoiled his enjoyment of the comic.  First off...huh? I can understand turning off a news/commentary broadcast because you didn't like the host's politics (sort of...you're still denying yourself an alternative viewpoint, which I consider unhealthy), but a COMIC?  Let's be serious, here!  I'm not a big fan of the politics espoused by either Paul McCartney or the late John Lennon, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna go burn my Beatles albums.  If the art doesn't express the politics, then try not to confuse the two.

Second, that's a rather childish way to react to an opposing opinion.  You dont agree with me on all points so you must be hatefilled and deluded.  Save me!  Grow up and learn that there are people out there who disagree with you.  This doesn't make them wrong, or bad, or crazy, or even deluded.  It just makes them not you.  If you disagree, tell them why in a thoughtful and polite manner.  Discuss the issue.  Maybe you'll both come away a little richer.

If you have a conflicting opinion a modifying opinion, or more to add, please feel free to use the tag board below.  I may put in a message base, later, or maybe I'll get a blogging program with a writeback function.  for now, that's the best I can do.

*I tend to use the traditional male-assumed way of referring to unknown humans...I hate "s/he" and all of its variants because they're too bulky,  "it" is rude, and the pseudopronoun "one" is problematic in most situations.  Sorry if this offends.^