Can we discuss the concept of "political" (without specific politics)

[Pam in CT]

re casual acquaintances, v FB "friends," vs IRL friends and family:

...I was defriended on Facebook this week for laughing at what I thought was a funny sign mocking people that play Pokemon Go and asking them to get off the sign holder's property. I don't care if people play it. Dh even downloaded it. I was laughing at the sign because the man was obviously bitter and the note was silly (something to the effect of, "I think Pokemon Go is more ridiculous than Hammer Pants, The Macarana" etc. I basically said I thought the sign was funny and if I saw it in real life I'd laugh and brush it off. This received a very negative reaction and I was defriended/blocked from both their personal page and one of their side pages.

 

...The term "friend" is too generous for a majority of my facebook connections. Acquaintances would be more appropriate. If someone is close enough to consider a friend then maybe you can just avoid certain topics and focus on the parts of the relationship that are more in sync.

I'm struggling with this, and I do think it relates back to Carrie's OP issue of if / when / where / how it's appropriate to talk about religion and politics (and other difficult and, I am coming around to believing, necessary) subjects.

 

It takes time and good will and mutual effort to communicate effectively across substantive differences... I don't think it's possible to do it in one-way FB-sized sniper-bytes, or without a context of good will and good manners and good communication skills... and I dunno that, really, time spent trying to "engage" casual acquaintances or people that I knew ages ago that I now only "see" on FB is time well spent.

 

There is bean dip, and there is "un-feeding"... but I also have the option of not tuning into FB at all (I only ever got an account to spy on my kids, and none of them use it much anymore)... and maybe that's a better option.  Certainly I doubt FB is effective as a medium for meaningful exchange on difficult subjects.

 

 

 

But.

And, see, 90% of my 160-ish FB friends are either family members, friends, or more than acquaintances if not quite friends.  10% may be a mixed bag of former schoolmates and internet acquaintances.  I clean house regularly for the more "acceptable" reasons, and the outright gross ones.

 

I've tried to skirt specific issues in this thread, but the reality is that I DON'T want to be friends with someone who doesn't believe Black Lives Matter, or who think evil is caused by secularism, or that poor people are lazy, or that they need to protect their kids from "the gay agenda".  It makes me feel sick and dirty.  But I'm the jackass if I can't just shut up and pretend their stance is peachy keen while we sip iced tea.

 

On the one hand, I think I understand what you're saying here -- to be silent in the face of injustice is to ratify it.  That is the idea I was stumbling towards above, that my understanding of racism has evolved from something I once believed was rooted in overt and obvious hatred, to something I now believe is really rooted in indifference.

 

So it won't do, to just shut up and pretend peachy keen, if doing so makes you feel sick and dirty.

 

 

But on the other hand, just walking away from relationships is, in essence, another form of non-engagement.  For casual acquaintances / distant FB friends, OK, fine, life is short, de-friend and carry on.  For longtime IRL true friends, or for family members, though, I do think it's worth the effort to try to work out how good people come to real differences (and, we do)... sometimes it IS an irreconcilable difference in human values, in which case, bean dip; but often it is not... often it is differences in the size and scope of the lens through which we're looking, or the "how" to address what if we hang in there turn out to be commonly shared problems, or -- often, I think -- what we respectively mean, when we use certain words... 

 

 

(I don't even know what I'm trying to say, here, except maybe keep the faith.)

Edited July 22, 2016 by Pam in CT

[LucyStoner]

I don't pretend to agree with people I disagree with strongly. At the same time, there are a lot of things people of conscious and with good intentions can disagree on. Also, I consider how someone expresses their views. Tone matters. Also, sometimes the best thing one can do is to gently challenge their preconceptions bias by being a good example of someone who disagrees with them.

 

One time a friend's new boyfriend expressed a fringe view (that will remained unnamed) that I was shocked to hear in my city and in my home while we were hosting them for dinner. You could have knocked me over with a feather. It wasn't a run of the mill hot topic. It something that was just beyond the realm of reasonable no matter how you cut it. I expressed that I disagreed but without mocking him or belittling him. Awhile later I come to realize that he's changed his opinion. He'd grown up that way and once he moved away and was exposed to other ideas, he realized how wackadoodle his previous view had been. If I had cut them off after they left or indignantly kicked him out middinner all that would have done would be to cause him to double down and hold on to the idea longer. He's a likable, nice guy who is now happily married to my friend. I was in their wedding and we have a close friendship. I'm glad we didn't lose that because he had expressed something that I was appalled by.

[heartlikealion]

And, see, 90% of my 160-ish FB friends are either family members, friends, or more than acquaintances if not quite friends.  10% may be a mixed bag of former schoolmates and internet acquaintances.  I clean house regularly for the more "acceptable" reasons, and the outright gross ones.

 

I've tried to skirt specific issues in this thread, but the reality is that I DON'T want to be friends with someone who doesn't believe Black Lives Matter, or who think evil is caused by secularism, or that poor people are lazy, or that they need to protect their kids from "the gay agenda".  It makes me feel sick and dirty.  But I'm the jackass if I can't just shut up and pretend their stance is peachy keen while we sip iced tea.

 

People that I used to hang out with IRL that I haven't met up with in years are on my FB. People I went to college with. People I'm related to. A few people I met through a homeschool group. Old colleagues. But I don't text or call the majority of the people on my FB page. If you're not deliberately added to my cell phone and vice versa, we're probably not that tight. "Friends" is subjective I guess. But there are few that would actually notice/care if we were in the same town at the same time. Sure we might say hi/catch up if we ran into each other, but we wouldn't go out of our way to say, "I'm coming that way, are you busy?" The reality is most people don't literally have 100+ friends no matter how many people they are linked to on social media. They just don't. I couldn't pick out five to be bridesmaids, let's put it that way. The majority of people on my facebook page don't even live within a 50 mile radius of me.

 

It doesn't really matter to me if you want to weed your facebook page. I'd rather be deleted than horribly tolerated. I'm just saying that I personally find it less confrontational to just hide people. Maybe I'm a coward.

 

I don't think you have to pretend necessarily. I think you can just slowly distance yourself from someone if you feel they are bringing drama or toxicity into your feed/life. Or avoid those specific topics.

[Guest]

I don't pretend to agree with people I disagree with strongly. At the same time, there are a lot of things people of conscious and with good intentions can disagree on. Also, I consider how someone expresses their views. Tone matters. Also, sometimes the best thing one can do is to gently challenge their preconceptions bias by being a good example of someone who disagrees with them.

 

One time a friend's new boyfriend expressed a fringe view (that will remained unnamed) that I was shocked to hear in my city and in my home while we were hosting them for dinner. You could have knocked me over with a feather. It wasn't a run of the mill hot topic. It something that was just beyond the realm of reasonable no matter how you cut it. I expressed that I disagreed but without mocking him or belittling him. Awhile later I come to realize that he's changed his opinion. He'd grown up that way and once he moved away and was exposed to other ideas, he realized how wackadoodle his previous view had been. If I had cut them off after they left or indignantly kicked him out middinner all that would have done would be to cause him to double down and hold on to the idea longer. He's a likable, nice guy who is now happily married to my friend. I was in their wedding and we have a close friendship. I'm glad we didn't lose that because he had expressed something that I was appalled by.

I agree with you, but I don't know that I would do that well in the moment. I haven't got much of a poker face. If you astound me, you will probably know it immediately. So I'm not sure how I would salvage my immediate reaction if something off-the-wall came out and surprised me at dinner.

[LucyStoner]

I'm thinking for me it's kind of like religion. I can be (and am) friends with people of different faith beliefs and backgrounds. But if they were viciously disparaging people not of their faith or they primarily saw our friendship as a recruiting tactic, papered my home with pamphlets or tried to convert my kids, I couldn't be their friend. It's about tone and mutual respect.

[LucyStoner]

I agree with you, but I don't know that I would do that well in the moment. I haven't got much of a poker face. If you astound me, you will probably know it immediately. So I'm not sure how I would salvage my immediate reaction if something off-the-wall came out and surprised me at dinner.

I ask a question to determine if he was just displaying a dry wit and then told him we didn't see eye to eye on the matter and gave a very brief explaination of why. Then I probably made a joke on a different topic because I do that all the time. I will admit I shot my friend a bit of a "what did he just say look". No one got angry

[Frances]

The 7 blind men and the elephant.

 

Even you don't have the whole picture.

 

Is it so important to change minds vs. be respected for having your own opinion? IMO everyone should vote their own conscience and I will vote mine.

I believe that in certain instances it is important to do everything possible to change hearts and minds and not just respect that someone else thinks or feels differently. As the mother of a gay son, I'm certainly thankful for those who have worked to change things for the better for sexual minorities. And speaking out was certainly important in helping to end slavery, segregation, etc. Eli Wiesel said some pretty powerful things about the danger of indifference and staying silent enabling oppressors, but never the oppressed.

[Btervet]

If we aren't able to befriend and even love those who have fundamentally different beliefs (especially on moral issues), how will we ever create change in their hearts?

 

When I was a teen I got involved in the gay rights movement. Besides the few people in knew in the LGBTQ community, everyone around me was extremely homophobic. If I cut them off, it would of been lonely real quick. Besides, they were and are good people - even if they hold a moral view that I find despicable. The world isn't so simple that I can just call them bad people and walk away. Good people can hold evil views, even on moral or ethical issues. In the 90's, the vast majority of people (in the south in the US at least) held pretty deplorable views of the LGBTQ community. But I cannot say that the vast majority of people were bad people, or unworthy of friendship.

 

Through my relationships with people, I've changed some hearts. Some have turned around on LGBTQ issues, others have simply softened their hate. I doubt that would of happened if I just walked away from them. I didn't lecture, but I also didn't hide by views, or my disappointment in their views. I do have plenty of people who I just won't talk about some issues with - if they start I just say that I don't want to get upset at them and won't talk about it. I still love them, I just don't want to be angry at them. I don't feel this is staying silent so much as picking my battles. They know I don't approve or agree, but still want to have a relationship with them. I suppose it is much the same way people feel about me in regards to their religious beliefs - I would be heartbroken if they walked away from me over our disagreement. 

 

I also held some pretty horrid ethical views growing up. People who reached out to me despite my views changed me for the better. I would not be who I am if they just walked away from me.

 

I'm sure their are lines that a friendship can't cross, but it would have to be severe for me. 

[Valley Girl]

If we aren't able to befriend and even love those who have fundamentally different beliefs (especially on moral issues), how will we ever create change in their hearts?

 

 

Or have our own changed as well? Sometimes we're the ones who have something to learn. (Not referring to any specific issue here.)

[Carrie12345]

If we aren't able to befriend and even love those who have fundamentally different beliefs (especially on moral issues), how will we ever create change in their hearts?

 

 

This is how I WANT to view things.

My experiences show painfully limited results, most of them just with my spouse, who didn't have much power to ignore me for the entirety of 16 years, lol.

 

Most of the people closest to me, including my own mother, refuse to engage in much beyond "I'm entitled to my opinion." My mom and aunt consider voicing any reasons for opinions to be bullying.

 

(My sister and I, however, challenge each other for sport, thank goodness!)

[Pam in CT]

re mutual open-ness vs evangelism:

If we aren't able to befriend and even love those who have fundamentally different beliefs (especially on moral issues), how will we ever create change in their hearts?

...

 

Or have our own changed as well? Sometimes we're the ones who have something to learn. (Not referring to any specific issue here.)

This to me is the heart of the matter -- the difference between "engaging" with the goal of changing other people, vs. "engaging" with the hope of understanding other people.  The former is evangelizing (and usually obvious, and irritating) while the latter is dialogue.  I don't much like it when other people try to evangelize me; the reverse, obviously, is also true.

 

 

 

 

This is how I WANT to view things.
My experiences show painfully limited results, most of them just with my spouse, who didn't have much power to ignore me for the entirety of 16 years, lol.

Most of the people closest to me, including my own mother, refuse to engage in much beyond "I'm entitled to my opinion." My mom and aunt consider voicing any reasons for opinions to be bullying.

(My sister and I, however, challenge each other for sport, thank goodness!)

...and of course your mom is entitled to her opinion.  And is under no obligation to voice reasons for it.  And if she perceives voicing reasons as bullying, then you're right -- she's not a great partner for real engagement... which requires good will and effort and investment of time and holding-discomfort on both sides.  

 

It takes two to tango -- in a bad dance / conversational dynamic, and also in a good dance / conversational dynamic.  Nobody can make anyone else come into substantive dialogue.... all we can do, unilaterally, is to tamp down our own counterproductive / snarky / coercive conversational dynamics.

 

 

 

(Once again, I don't even know where I'm going with this... I'm just thinking on screen, here... but I think I just talked myself into deleting my FB account.  Interesting.)

 

 

 

 

 

ETA to btervet: I just reread what I wrote, and want to clarify that I did not read your whole post as promoting evangelism... I just clipped that one part to cue up a contrast with RH's response, which together illustratesmy interior dialogue, lol....)  

 

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2016 by Pam in CT

[TranquilMind]

In this article on why third parties aren't doing well, the polarization of the electorate is discussed : http://www.npr.org/2016/07/12/485275509/americans-really-dislike-trump-clinton-so-why-arent-third-parties-doing-better . Here is a quote that was really shocking to me: 

 

One astounding measure of this [polarization] : As of 1960, only 4 percent of Democrats and 5 percent of Republicans said they would be "displeased" if their son or daughter married someone of the opposite party, according to a 2012 study from Stanford University. In 2010, the shares who would be "somewhat or very unhappy" were 33 percent for Democrats and 49 percent for Republicans.

 

If you wouldn't want your kid to marry someone of the other party, I guess you wouldn't want them on your FB friends list. I have friends on both sides of the aisle who post wildly partisan memes.  Over the years, I've just blocked the sites where the memes come from and I don't see the crazy partisan stuff and we remain friends. 

 

On the other hand, as Quill said, on a specific moral issue, such as racism (which I don't regard as a political issue) , I would feel differently.  

 

Oh, goodness. That is just insane to be "very unhappy" at the way a potential mate of your child votes.  There are so many more important qualities to me. 

 

I married someone who was of another political view at the time.  We have been married for decades and we only grew closer together.  But then we can debate without rage and anger. 

 

I cannot imagine what candidate a person chooses out of the often terrible lot of choices would be important enough for me to unfriend them.  Geez.  My feed is full of raging (people of the opposite view).    They provide much amusement. I'm sure I provide amusement to them on the rare occasion I say anything about politics.  Mostly we just make each other laugh about other stuff, though there are a few of the "I must immortalize every moment of my life via photo" folks that make me just shake my head. 

 

I guess I am not a person who cannot tolerate opposing views or think everyone who is a friend needs to be my clone. 

It is true that for close friends we tend to choose those like us, but goodness, it just isn't a litmus test that they vote like me. 

 

 

[TranquilMind]

YES. I don't align myself with any political party and no longer participate in politics. That doesn't mean I don't have very strong views on things like racism, war, the plight of refugees, and the sanctity of life. All those issues transcend politics and are hugely related to who I am as a person and what I believe about life. In the same way, I think I can learn a lot about other people as I listen to their views on these issues.

 

That said, it's possible for me to have more respect for someone who has carefully thought through their position and disagrees with me than for someone who unthinkingly holds to the "party line." A certain degree of open-mindedness (on both our parts) helps, too.

 

I see a huge distinction as well. 

 

And a big yes to the remark about respect. 

 

[TranquilMind]

I can't get along well with ideologues who like to demonize those who disagree with them about anything or everything. Regardless of if I agree with the ideologue on basic political views or not. I find ideologues across the political spectrum.

This.

 

I'm really so tired of this. 

[HollyDay]

Politics, religion, money.  3 things my mother always said not to discuss at dinner parties. 

 

Having said that.....

 

A lot depends upon the persons involved and the setting.  I've had some perfectly wonderful discussions with people whose views  are polar opposits of mine.  It has been not only civil, but engaging, entertaining, and informative.  We have come away feeling like we know each other better and with warmer feeling toward one another.  I've also had some pretty uncomfortable conversations with people too.  I recall one that was pretty intense over BabyWise vs Attachment Parenting.  It doesn't have to be a "big hot topic" to have an uncomfortable debate. 

 

My bachelor's degree is in political science.  I have a boat load of international affairs, history, polisci, and constitutional law classes in my college credits.  I obviously think that everyone needs to be politically aware.  Know the issues, have informed/educated opinions on those issues.   Be able to say, "I support XYZ because of this/that." or "I cannot support XYZ because of this/that."  And be respectful.  If we disagree then we disagree.  It is not a personal slight on me if you hold a different opinion.  How boring it would be!  Maybe I'm naive.  I don't know.  I hope not.  But, I'm willing to accept that maybe I am.....

 

[TranquilMind]

I dunno, John Adams considered Thomas Jefferson a dear friend even though he disagreed with him on many things you & I don't even think are debatable.

 

I think that if we were born in that time, we could understand that that's what we were each born into, and maybe try to influence by example or gentle speech without ever expecting a full conversion.  And maybe we could each learn some things from each other, because the fact of being a slave owner or not is not the sum total of who a person is.

 

Hey, I saw North and South.  ;)

[hornblower]

Seems to me few people have the self-awareness to realize they're the ideologue in the room. 

[TranquilMind]

Seems to me few people have the self-awareness to realize they're the ideologue in the room. 

 

Exactly.

[Valley Girl]

Seems to me few people have the self-awareness to realize they're the ideologue in the room. 

 

Very good point. There's a tendency on all sides to define it as the other guy in the disagreement as a matter of course.

[Carrie12345]

Very good point. There's a tendency on all sides to define it as the other guy in the disagreement as a matter of course.

 

I'm okay with being one in certain respects.

 

ETA: I quoted the wrong post, lol.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Carrie12345

[Pam in CT]

re supportive venues for substantive dialogue

Politics, religion, money.  3 things my mother always said not to discuss at dinner parties. 

 

Having said that.....

 

A lot depends upon the persons involved and the setting.  I've had some perfectly wonderful discussions with people whose views  are polar opposits of mine.  It has been not only civil, but engaging, entertaining, and informative.  We have come away feeling like we know each other better and with warmer feeling toward one another.  I've also had some pretty uncomfortable conversations with people too.  I recall one that was pretty intense over BabyWise vs Attachment Parenting.  It doesn't have to be a "big hot topic" to have an uncomfortable debate. 

 

My bachelor's degree is in political science.  I have a boat load of international affairs, history, polisci, and constitutional law classes in my college credits.  I obviously think that everyone needs to be politically aware.  Know the issues, have informed/educated opinions on those issues.   Be able to say, "I support XYZ because of this/that." or "I cannot support XYZ because of this/that."  And be respectful.  If we disagree then we disagree.  It is not a personal slight on me if you hold a different opinion.  How boring it would be!  Maybe I'm naive.  I don't know.  I hope not.  But, I'm willing to accept that maybe I am.....

 

Yeah, well, dinner parties may not be much better, as a venue for substantive dialogue across differences, than Facebook...  :lol:

 

It's a tricky balance.  I made one of my Passover guests very uncomfortable this year by drawing a connection between a portion of the text we (always) read, remember the stranger, for once you were strangers in Egypt... and the current refugee crisis.  On the one hand, the issue is weighing pretty heavily on my mind, it's our house, we run the service, blah blah blah.  On the other, I really don't want to make my beloved guests uncomfortable at my table.  I'm sorry I made that particular moment uncomfortable.  

 

That's not to say I don't ever want to make anyone, or even that particular (longstanding, goodwill-ed) friend, uncomfortable.  I'm done with dialing every area of difference back, just to keep people comfortable -- I no longer believe it's actually helpful.

 

But having made that mistake, I hope to be a little more mindful about choosing my moments.

[Murphy101]

All questions of morality are political.

All questions of politics are moral.

 

I don't expect to be besties with people I have strong fundamental differences on morals/politics.

 

But I don't usually have to be besties to get along.

[Murphy101]

That said, ime, people don't want to discuss things and they for sure don't want to discuss it rationally.

 

They want emotional responses of presumed agreement and get cranky when they don't get it.

[HollyDay]

That said, ime, people don't want to discuss things and they for sure don't want to discuss it rationally.

 

They want emotional responses of presumed agreement and get cranky when they don't get it.

 

cranky is a good choice to describe it.  I just wish everyone would become politically aware and remain respectful.  I hear so much about tolerance, but so often discussions don't seem that way.   Participate in the process.  Know why you are participating and for what you stand.  Dig deeper than the rhetoric.   Be able to give a reason for why you feel the way you do and why you participate the way you do (or don't do).  But, please, be respectful when dealing with folks who have different points of view.