What can we, as individual US citizens do to improve the division (non-political)

[Not_a_Number]

I'm sorry. I don't think I'm making myself clear, although I think @Sneezyone certainly understands. The question is: if they come for me and my family, will you care more about that, or will you care more about divisions in your own communities? Because my family is pretty abstract, right? It comes from a different state. You've never met me. I'm not real, in some sense.

However, the people near you are very real. They aren't abstract. They are family. They are friends. They are all good people. They ARE all good people. I'm not arguing with you... most people are locally good people, which is why you may not want to pick a fight with them when they support hurting my family. 

So do I really want divisions healed? I'm already a person who can see things from many sides. I'm not a zealot. WHAT DOES IT BUY ME, IN THE END? 

[Pen]

 

Quote

Statistically it's a whole lot more likely that any one person would become part of the silent crowd condoning atrocities than that one person would become a victim of those atrocities. So it's a whole lot more helpful and productive to be looking to myself and examining myself for bias than in looking for it in my neighbors.

 

I think this is extremely important!

 

I think people need to be ready to do this regardless of who is in office and to realize that people have fears of atrocities being committed regardless of what “side” is in power, and that both “sides” tend to see the people from the other “side” as the ones likely to commit atrocities or fail to stop them from being committed. 

 

And each of us can only do self examination for ourselves.  Each of us can only do action for ourselves. 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Pen

[J-rap]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I am sure they care about the same things with respect to their own family. I have grave doubts about whether they care about MY family. 

Do you see what I’m saying? I’m sure they are all lovely people within the context of their communities. Will they protest if the government suddenly stops handing out Greencards or citizenships? Will they care if there’s a purge of Jews from universities? Will they protect ME? 

I see what you mean...  But I think a lot of really decent people just don't ever get out of their bubble.  I don't think it's their fault, it's just the way humans are ~  the environment they grew up in, the way their brains function, the way their habits formed as they were growing up into adulthood, the way that life feels complex enough as is.  I think MOST people I know are like that.  I think it's a natural human reaction to live within a bubble of your upbringing, your particular circumstances, your tribe.  (It's not a choice people make.)  And I would for sure be the same as anyone if I was born into their circumstances.  Perhaps that served well at some point in the evolutionary scheme.  But now it can be a real disadvantage, and it causes people to be blind to a lot of things in the world around them.

I don't know what causes some people to be forced to move beyond that natural bubble and expand their world view.  I was definitely very much once in that bubble.  Not a conservative Christian bubble, but still the bubble of my upbringing and experiences.  I thought I was a thoughtful and decent person, but I now realize I was so naive to the world around me and other people's circumstances.  I thought I saw the world as it really was, but in hind site, I know that I could only interpret it from my narrow perspective.  It's still a work in progress for me!

For me, it was a dh who was a brilliant and challenging thinker, plus several life-changing tragedies that forced me very uncomfortably to move beyond that bubble.  Once you do, you can never turn back and the world is never the same.  

ETA:  After re-reading this, I realize it probably makes me sound like I think I'm some kind of a special person to see outside of my bubble, and I really didn't mean that at all!  I'm a late-bloomer actually, and I know without a doubt that I'm still blinded by my own brain more often than not.  

Edited November 7, 2020 by J-rap

[Pen]

11 minutes ago, J-rap said:

I see what you mean...  But I think a lot of really decent people just don't ever get out of their bubble.  I don't think it's their fault, it's just the way humans are ~  the environment they grew up in, the way their brains function, the way their habits formed as they were growing up into adulthood, the way that life feels complex enough as is.  I think MOST people I know are like that.  I think it's a natural human reaction to live within a bubble of your upbringing, your particular circumstances, your tribe.  (It's not a choice people make.)  And I would for sure be the same as anyone if I was born into their circumstances.  Perhaps that served well at some point in the evolutionary scheme.  But now it can be a real disadvantage, and it causes people to be blind to a lot of things in the world around them.

I don't know what causes some people to be forced to move beyond that natural bubble and expand their world view.  I was definitely very much once in that bubble.  Not a conservative Christian bubble, but still the bubble of my upbringing and experiences.  I thought I was a thoughtful and decent person, but I now realize I was so naive to the world around me and other people's circumstances.  I thought I saw the world as it really was, but in hind site, I know that I could only interpret it from my narrow perspective.  It's still a work in progress for me!

For me, it was a dh who was a brilliant and challenging thinker, plus several life-changing tragedies that forced me very uncomfortably to move beyond that bubble.  Once you do, you can never turn back and the world is never the same.  

 

 

This can also happen more than once.

 

People can start in one bubble, then move beyond that to an expanded view, then move beyond that to a yet more expanded view...

At each stage it is quite possible to see the limits of past smaller bubble, but often not to realized that there are bubbles within bubbles, and that what now feels expansive, is itself still a bubble.

 

 

[Lori D.]

2 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I’ve done it!! I do so much work talking to people who differ from me. I’m SO aware of my own actions and biases. You all know me. You know it’s true.

But what does it buy me? Will others do the same for me?

I’m not being political here. I just want to understand what I’m supposed to GET out of all this hard work. 

Freedom from disappointed expectations -- that if I do this hard work that I expect others "will" or "should" too.
Freedom from the exhausting work of mentally controlling everything -- that I can *only* do this if *you* will do that
Freedom to grow from my choices -- and not be constrained by what others choose to do or not do.

Harder perhaps is the freedom to be okay to with never seeing the good consequences of my actions -- being good with the goal of being the "stepping stone" for future generations. I remember hearing about the writings of many of the 17th century early European colonists to the U.S., who stated that they knew they were coming here with nothing and would spend their entire lives here just being a foundation (stepping stone) that their children, but especially their grandchildren would be the ones to flourish and benefit from their hard labors -- and they were good with that idea -- building good for the future generations.

Edited November 6, 2020 by Lori D.

[J-rap]

3 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

This can also happen more than once.

 

People can start in one bubble, then move beyond that to an expanded view, then move beyond that to a yet more expanded view...

At each stage it is quite possible to see the limits of past smaller bubble, but often not to realized that there are bubbles within bubbles, and that what now feels expansive, is itself still a bubble.

 

 

That's weird to think, isn't it?  I assume this will happen through our entire lives.  It's not like we're released from one bubble and then free!

[J-rap]

1 minute ago, Happymomof1 said:

I agree. But at the same time, that is exhausting. So many things have rocked my world recently. To be honest, I'm ready to go back to my bubble and naively believe everyone is nice and sweet and the world can be a good place. Don't know that I can go back. But do not know if I can live with my new information either. Not sure I'm explaining myself well.  But for my mental health, I should probably just get back into my bubble. But then that isn't helping make the world a better place.  But if I disintegrate, that won't help either.

I think you're explaining yourself very well, and I think I know exactly what you mean!

[Pen]

5 minutes ago, J-rap said:

That's weird to think, isn't it?  I assume this will happen through our entire lives.  It's not like we're released from one bubble and then free!

 

True.

 

And sometimes I think people who are in their first emergence from bubble one can be particularly intolerant because there is a felt sense of “aha, enlightenment- now I know all and others do not” at that point, without yet realizing that the emergence too is still a narrow perspective.  

 

 

[J-rap]

Just now, Pen said:

 

True.

 

And sometimes I think people who are in their first emergence from bubble one can be particularly intolerant because there is a felt sense of “aha, enlightenment- now I know all and others do not” at that point, without yet realizing that the emergence too is still a narrow perspective.  

 

 

What I have found is that the further along that path I go, the less I realize I really know.  

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Lori D. said:

Freedom from expectations -- that if I do this hard work that others "will" or "should" too.
Freedom from the exhausting work of mentally controlling everything -- that I can *only* do this if *you* will do that
Freedom to grow from my choices -- and not be constrained by what others choose to do or not do.

Harder perhaps is the freedom to be okay to with never seeing the good consequences of my actions -- being good with the goal of being the "stepping stone" for future generations. I remember hearing about the writings of many of the 17th century early European colonists to the U.S., who stated that they knew they were coming here with nothing and would spend their entire lives here just being a foundation (stepping stone) that their children, but especially their grandchildren would be the ones to flourish and benefit from their hard labors -- and they were good with that idea -- building good for the future generations.

I agree with this.

When I was doing ancestry work a few years ago, I marveled at census records that showed 9-11 family members residing in a tiny alley house in Baltimore City. In one case, there were a few "extra" people, whom I have no idea if they were relatives or just someone else my ancestors took under wing. But it was extraordinary to think, they immigrated here, were no doubt treated poorly, didn't speak the language or know the local customs, and died before that could really blossom into a prosperous life. They passed the possibility of a prosperous life down to their kids and grandkids and great-grandkids, but they don't seem to have reaped it themselves. 

[Not_a_Number]

38 minutes ago, Lori D. said:

Freedom from expectations -- that if I do this hard work that others "will" or "should" too.
Freedom from the exhausting work of mentally controlling everything -- that I can *only* do this if *you* will do that
Freedom to grow from my choices -- and not be constrained by what others choose to do or not do.

Harder perhaps is the freedom to be okay to with never seeing the good consequences of my actions -- being good with the goal of being the "stepping stone" for future generations. I remember hearing about the writings of many of the 17th century early European colonists to the U.S., who stated that they knew they were coming here with nothing and would spend their entire lives here just being a foundation (stepping stone) that their children, but especially their grandchildren would be the ones to flourish and benefit from their hard labors -- and they were good with that idea -- building good for the future generations.

That's really not my point. I already know the point of doing it, and I'm not going to stop doing it, nor teaching my kids to do it, because it's important to me. My point is that while you're healing divisions in your communities, you may very well sacrifice outsiders on the altar of "community" and "togetherness." What I do or don't do won't change the outcome of that. 

It isn't the people who want to get rid of "divisions" who wind up standing up for their principles. One of the people I've admired most recently on these boards is @MercyA, because she stood by her principles even when it created divisions. It is so, so hard to do it. And yet it is so, so important. 

So, by all means, you should make sure to stay polite and civil and kind. You should see the other side. You should value the good and forgive the bad. But the danger with that approach is that you, too, may become coopted. What will it take you to decide that the values people are ignoring and the red lines people are crossing make it worth it to stand up to them, divisions be damned? 

I'm going to bow out of this thread. I don't think I'm making myself clear, frankly. I hope that my participation on these boards has bought enough goodwill that you know that I don't pick random fights and that I am very willing to see other points of view, and that I am not advocating creating unnecessary divisions. What I'm trying to say is that "healing divisions" is not always the greatest good. You can have an undivided society that does evil. 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Jean in Newcastle]

The other day at my new volunteer gig I was able to really talk to some people in my community about some things that have caused a lot of division locally.  They were on one side and I was on the other.  They were complaining about my side (not knowing that they were not in an echo chamber) and my approach to healing the division was to actually speak up and tell them that I had a different view.  That caused them to stop and focus on listening to me rather than the nameless/faceless "other side".  I was polite.  I was able to articulate what I saw them saying (accurately, I think, since everyone seemed to agree with me) and I was able to give answers for why I (and others I've talked to) think the way we do.  And then we talked together about how as a community we could work together to find common ground and common solutions.  Now I don't think that they agree with me on the issue now but at least the focus shifted from "let's dig in our heels and get everyone to our side" to "let's work together to find solutions that all will find helpful."  This is a conversation that I hope to have a lot in the community.  I am bringing it up in person, on Nextdoor (where a lot of this is being hashed out locally) and with people who reach out to me by phone or text.

(Obviously this won't work in every scenario but I'm not trying to find a solution to every scenario.  Just the ones that I am faced with in my community.)

[livetoread]

NotANumber, I do hear exactly what you are saying, and it’s a real concern. While we work so hard at building community, we have to be aware of what principles call for challenging that same community and even creating divisions. Causing good trouble, if you will. We as a species seem quite prone to forgiving and excusing the kind of behavior that lays the groundwork for bad things as long as it is people who we think are nice and good doing it.
 

I have pondered a lot over the last few years what makes someone a “good person.” No answers yet.

[Lori D.]

24 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

That's really not my point. I already know the point of doing it, and I'm not going to stop doing it, nor teaching my kids to do it, because it's important to me. My point is that while you're healing divisions in your communities, you may very well sacrifice outsiders on the altar of "community" and "togetherness."

So sorry! I misunderstood. I did not see your second point in the post I quoted.

[Pen]

 

 

Quote

So, by all means, you should make sure to stay polite and civil and kind. You should see the other side. You should value the good and forgive the bad. But the danger with that approach is that you, too, may become coopted. What will it take you to decide that the values people are ignoring and the red lines people are crossing make it worth it to stand up to them, divisions be damned? 

 

 

When you write “you” may become coopted is that a universal “you” that includes yourself?

 

A big part of problem I am seeing is that each “side” sees itself as in the right and the other “side” as other than and wrong and potentially extremely dangerous. 

 

I think a step forward in healing division is to look at ourselves rather that at “you” the bad other.  

The “We are good; they are bad” and its variant “I am right; you are co-opted” type rhetoric is part of what I see as causing the division and divisiveness, in mainstream media and also on social media like here. 

All of us may be co-opted and very few people actually stand up as heroes to protect a stranger in real life.   Nonetheless we can do more. 

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Pen

[Momto6inIN]

Not going to tag Not a Number because she said she was bowing out and I want to respect that. And I think she's right that sometimes we have to draw lines in the sand about evil and that will, of necessity, create some division. I'm ok with that and have no argument with that.

I think the problem is that frequently in our current society people on all parts of the political spectrum tend to ascribe evil intentions and outcomes to other ways of thinking when it really is just a different perspective and a different way of looking at the problem and a different idea of what a good solution might be.

And an even trickier aspect to the problem is that we all have such different measuring sticks to evaluate what is truly evil and what can and should be chalked up to differences of opinion. Value systems come into play here, which always makes things trickier.

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Wow, how were you able to do it with the Covid precautions???  

I just feel like this board has a double standard sort of. Everyone says don't risk others.  But then get involved. I don't see how we can do both.  I would love to do what you did and I could if I wanted to go places where people don't wear masks. But then am I not spreading it???  I'm just so conflicted about all of this.  I feel like I either get out in the community and talk and make a difference, but then I am spreading Covid or encouraging others to do so. Or I am a hermit.

Every community/volunteer activity I have participated in over the last three months involved social distancing and masks.

[Jean in Newcastle]

9 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Wow, how were you able to do it with the Covid precautions???  

I just feel like this board has a double standard sort of. Everyone says don't risk others.  But then get involved. I don't see how we can do both.  I would love to do what you did and I could if I wanted to go places where people don't wear masks. But then am I not spreading it???  I'm just so conflicted about all of this.  I feel like I either get out in the community and talk and make a difference, but then I am spreading Covid or encouraging others to do so. Or I am a hermit.

I wore a mask.  There were also gloves and hand sanitizer available for those who wanted it.  I spoke loud enough and clear enough for people to hear me from six feet away.  (And no, we weren't yelling or anything.)  I smiled and laughed and joked with the people we were helping (they drove up and I delivered things to their cars).  They could hear the smile in my voice. 

My state has a mask mandate and people follow it. 

[TechWife]

Three main ideas:

Recognize other people are people and that is the basis for treating each other well. Make exercising decorum/good manners the norm again. It is the basis of respectful dialogue. Emily Post should be mandatory reading.

Don't expect one institution to solve complicated problems. It takes a variety of viewpoints, experiences and a lot of resources to solve complicated problems. Work together - realize the strengths different approaches have and promote those. Learn where the holes are and strive to fill them. Be flexible.

We need to intentionally build local communities. Bring back the dinner party. We need casual opportunities to have fun together, encourage one another/build each other up and to discuss topics that are important to us. When people know each other they care about each other.

 

 

 

 

 

[Rosie_0801]

People need less stressful lives. 
Stressed people, and just about everyone is, right from childhood, are not at their most tolerant. They get graspy. They get punitive. People who don't have enough or feel insecure about keeping enough know that "love isn't all you need." You need power. 

Perhaps people need to spend less time on social media, but they also need shorter commutes and better public transport.

[Jaybee]

This may only be a little snippet of it, but it's been on my mind a lot the past couple of days. And that is, if we could get rid of the attitude: "You can't be (or must be) ________, if you vote for ________." The automatic labeling without even listening to discourse and trying to understand is really bothering me. As a couple of pp said above, of course we need to be careful that we are not compromising our values and principles in our attempts to be undivided. But there are ways that we can still treat others with respect and kindness, and build on things we do have in common, without relegating the other person to a label only, at least in most cases/scenarios.

[mum]

As well as all of the above, in order to stop being so divided we need to vote for leaders that display behavior that is not divisive. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

2 minutes ago, Jaybee said:

This may only be a little snippet of it, but it's been on my mind a lot the past couple of days. And that is, if we could get rid of the attitude: "You can't be (or must be) ________, if you vote for ________." The automatic labeling without even listening to discourse and trying to understand is really bothering me. As a couple of pp said above, of course we need to be careful that we are not compromising our values and principles in our attempts to be undivided. But there are ways that we can still treat others with respect and kindness, and build on things we do have in common, without relegating the other person to a label only, at least in most cases/scenarios.

This is what I have been combating in my community. There has been a lot of “if you love  ______ then you will support ______.” This is on both sides. I have been saying over and over again “We all love _____.  We can agree on that even if we disagree on this issue. Let’s find a way to support each other.”  

[frogger]

8 hours ago, KeriJ said:

I definitely would like to unpack the idea of staying off social media and just leaving it to the wolves as opposed to sticking around attempting to add to the voices of reason.  It's something that I ponder daily and haven't figured out yet. 

TBH- most people are much like me in that they don't go to Facebook for highly intellectual hard work. They go to facebook for  brain candy or escapism or vegging out and then see a bunch of angry posts and respond accordingly.

If you want to prep yourself, look for the most likely conversation, and zone in and do the hard work of responding correctly without losing your cool you might get a couple of people to actually read your stuff. I have spent long amounts of time looking stuff up and trying to put it in a logical order and that usually just ends the conversation. I'm a conversation killer. Hee hee. People don't want to work and read an essay, they just want to read exciting stuff that will get them ramped up. It is an entertainment thing. 

I don't know how to get adults to eat their veggies, read a book that takes thinking, rather than automatically reach for the candy, a ranting tribal post on Facebook. They already worked today. They are ready to relax.

What do you do?

I'd rather just not deal with social media echo chambers. It's harder for them to ignore me in person or to just get up and leave. 

[Pam in CT]

re "good person/ horrible person" vs good-enough interaction

5 hours ago, itsheresomewhere said:

One thing that needs to start is realizing that people can have a different opinion than you and still be a good person.   I have personally seen this lately too much and don’t get it.  Why does it make someone a horrible person if they don’t agree with you.

The ability to listen, being able to read, understand, and determine the facts are becoming lost skills that is contributing to this.  

I fully agree with the purple part. I wonder whether lapsing into the good/ horrible PERSON language inhibits those abilities. I mean, hard conversations are hard. We don't manage to get quite the perfect magic words on the first try, we misread one another's tone or gestures, we're a little short or snarky or defensive in first response... okay. Those kinds of very common stumbles make communication hard.

What happens if instead of receiving a difficult interaction as "this person with whom I disagree thinks I'm a horrible person," the frame is "this conversation we're trying to have across disagreement is a difficult interaction ?"  To acknowledge the discomfort of a misfiring communication, but reframe/define the discomfort  as around the dynamic of interaction?  I dunno... that language just kind of jumps out to me as imputing static (and binary, and extreme) qualities on the people when to my mind it's really about the intrinsic difficulty of the trying itself.  That seems unhelpful to the purple cause.

 

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, TechWife said:

Three main ideas:

Recognize other people are people and that is the basis for treating each other well. Make exercising decorum/good manners the norm again. It is the basis of respectful dialogue. Emily Post should be mandatory reading.

Don't expect one institution to solve complicated problems. It takes a variety of viewpoints, experiences and a lot of resources to solve complicated problems. Work together - realize the strengths different approaches have and promote those. Learn where the holes are and strive to fill them. Be flexible.

We need to intentionally build local communities. Bring back the dinner party. We need casual opportunities to have fun together, encourage one another/build each other up and to discuss topics that are important to us. When people know each other they care about each other.

All of this, particularly the bolded.

[MercyA]

1 hour ago, Happymomof1 said:

Yeah, not here. As I mentioned Meals on Wheels and the food bank have cut way back on volunteers and don't need any. I don't know what they are doing. But when they handed out the free lunches for the kids- no masks. Heck, right now our elementary kids don't have to do masks at all in public school. Our town had all of its normal Halloween activities. From what I saw online, very few masks.   Our children's minister was supposed to have a baby shower when Covid hit. Her child is 6 months old, but we are now having it. So this Sunday our entire church is invited. I'm guessing I will be one of very few wearing a mask. I will bring the guest book, help set up and then probably leave and come back to help clean up quickly.  Though even that, am I encouraging it? But I hate it. I could have a ton of good conversations there if I wished to.  Instead, I will run in and run out. 

I feel for you and understand your frustration. Just do what you can. You *are* saying something, by your example. You are saying, I love my church, I want to help, and I am doing what I can to keep everyone else safe. 

[MercyA]

4 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

What will it take you to decide that the values people are ignoring and the red lines people are crossing make it worth it to stand up to them, divisions be damned? 

QFT.

I hope this is not political. 

The difficult thing for me is this: I want unity in my church. I want to preserve friendships. But in this case differences in opinion (arising, frankly, from differences in "facts") are very literally costing people their lives. I'm thinking of covid in particular but other things come to mind as well.

I have been wrong in the past many, many times. Absolutely. But it's this stubbornness when people are dying that is making me crazy.

I don't know all the right things to do right now. I appreciate this thread, Quill. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

12 minutes ago, MercyA said:

QFT.

I hope this is not political. 

The difficult thing for me is this: I want unity in my church. I want to preserve friendships. But in this case differences in opinion (arising, frankly, from differences in "facts") are very literally costing people their lives. I'm thinking of covid in particular but other things come to mind as well.

I have been wrong in the past many, many times. Absolutely. But it's this stubbornness when people are dying that is making me crazy.

I don't know all the right things to do right now. I appreciate this thread, Quill. 

My take on this.  I do what I believe is right.  (This isn't always moral right but often is.)  I speak up in forums that allow me to speak up - ie a meeting at church, a city council meeting etc.  But then I leave the results up to God.  Some of the times that means that God allows people to reap the results of their decisions.  Sometimes they (in my opinion) get away with skating on thin ice.  But my influence is limited.  I feel like I'm only responsible for myself, my actions and the limited voice that I have.  I don't feel like I'm responsible for taking on the stress of the world. 

[Pen]

2 hours ago, TechWife said:

Three main ideas:

Recognize other people are people and that is the basis for treating each other well. Make exercising decorum/good manners the norm again. It is the basis of respectful dialogue. Emily Post should be mandatory reading.

Don't expect one institution to solve complicated problems. It takes a variety of viewpoints, experiences and a lot of resources to solve complicated problems. Work together - realize the strengths different approaches have and promote those. Learn where the holes are and strive to fill them. Be flexible.

We need to intentionally build local communities. Bring back the dinner party. We need casual opportunities to have fun together, encourage one another/build each other up and to discuss topics that are important to us. When people know each other they care about each other.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with 

All of this. 

[MercyA]

1 hour ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

My take on this.  I do what I believe is right.  (This isn't always moral right but often is.)  I speak up in forums that allow me to speak up - ie a meeting at church, a city council meeting etc.  But then I leave the results up to God.  Some of the times that means that God allows people to reap the results of their decisions.  Sometimes they (in my opinion) get away with skating on thin ice.  But my influence is limited.  I feel like I'm only responsible for myself, my actions and the limited voice that I have.  I don't feel like I'm responsible for taking on the stress of the world. 

Well-said and an excellent reminder, Jean. Thank you. 

[livetoread]

4 hours ago, Momto6inIN said:

I think the problem is that frequently in our current society people on all parts of the political spectrum tend to ascribe evil intentions and outcomes to other ways of thinking when it really is just a different perspective and a different way of looking at the problem and a different idea of what a good solution might be.

I agree with this, but what I’ve been pondering is the basic fact that people with really good intentions can still greatly increase the suffering of others. People who are really nice and mean well and would give you the shirt off their back can support policies whose consequences are truly awful for other people. Good intentions or bad intentions, the result is the same. And I find it really hard to square that circle. Of course, I have been guilty of the same thing in my past and am no doubt still guilty of it in ways I will understand later. But my ponderings keep leading me back to thinking about how good, well-meaning people have done some serious damage to others through their ignorance, stubbornness, inability to think critically, or difficulty with empathy beyond their small world. I generally assume everyone is doing the best they can, and almost everyone wants to be a good, decent person, and yet here we are.

Maybe part of the key is also in what you say - that we have different value systems and ways of measuring what is most important.

[frogger]

29 minutes ago, livetoread said:

I agree with this, but what I’ve been pondering is the basic fact that people with really good intentions can still greatly increase the suffering of others. People who are really nice and mean well and would give you the shirt off their back can support policies whose consequences are truly awful for other people. Good intentions or bad intentions, the result is the same. And I find it really hard to square that circle. Of course, I have been guilty of the same thing in my past and am no doubt still guilty of it in ways I will understand later. But my ponderings keep leading me back to thinking about how good, well-meaning people have done some serious damage to others through their ignorance, stubbornness, inability to think critically, or difficulty with empathy beyond their small world. I generally assume everyone is doing the best they can, and almost everyone wants to be a good, decent person, and yet here we are.

Maybe part of the key is also in what you say - that we have different value systems and ways of measuring what is most important.

Hmmm.. The road to hell and all that.

This is where listening is so helpful. Often those things which sound the most benevolent don't work out so well in practice.

I think it is hard to listen to feedback at the national level. If your policy is hurting someone they won't be able to tell you unless they are fat cats with hefty donations. My city council though and even my state representative can hear me out. That might be less so in a larger state but it certainly makes a difference.

[Hilltopmom]

As an elementary school teacher, things I can do and am doing:

teach and model tolerance & respect for all 

teach that people can disagree but still be respectful & still get along

embrace diversity

expose my students to literature written by and focusing on people different than they are, from all cultures & backgrounds

Teach history & science- not focused on much in grade school unfortunately but I cover a lot, even if it’s only a read aloud or videos on some topics 

teach social emotional skills (empathy, kindness, respect, how to handle your emotions)

 

 

 

 

[Momto6inIN]

2 hours ago, livetoread said:

I agree with this, but what I’ve been pondering is the basic fact that people with really good intentions can still greatly increase the suffering of others. People who are really nice and mean well and would give you the shirt off their back can support policies whose consequences are truly awful for other people. Good intentions or bad intentions, the result is the same. And I find it really hard to square that circle. Of course, I have been guilty of the same thing in my past and am no doubt still guilty of it in ways I will understand later. But my ponderings keep leading me back to thinking about how good, well-meaning people have done some serious damage to others through their ignorance, stubbornness, inability to think critically, or difficulty with empathy beyond their small world. I generally assume everyone is doing the best they can, and almost everyone wants to be a good, decent person, and yet here we are.

Maybe part of the key is also in what you say - that we have different value systems and ways of measuring what is most important.

You're right - policies we support often have negative consequences for someone, sometimes lots of people. But that's true of any policy created by any any party, because there are very few governmental solutions that are good for everyone. We tend to focus on how the other side's policies do this and ignore how ours does it too.

[Frances]

6 hours ago, Momto6inIN said:

You're right - policies we support often have negative consequences for someone, sometimes lots of people. But that's true of any policy created by any any party, because there are very few governmental solutions that are good for everyone. We tend to focus on how the other side's policies do this and ignore how ours does it too.

I agree. And it also sometimes go beyond supporting or opposing policies and instead is about basic, fundamental values such as what kind of leaders do we want to choose to represent and lead us. Is there common ground to be found in qualities we require or expect our leaders to have? Can we agree on any fundamental characteristics regardless of party or platform? Is there any agreement about norms or standards that cannot be violated?

Edited November 7, 2020 by Frances

[Momto6inIN]

3 hours ago, Frances said:

I agree. And it also sometimes go beyond supporting or opposing policies and instead is about basic, fundamental values such as what kind of leaders do we want to choose to represent and lead us. Is there common ground to be found in qualities we require or expect our leaders to have? Can we agree on any fundamental characteristics regardless of party or platform? Is there any agreement about norms or standards that cannot be violated?

You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently not. We've turned into a society that values style and charisma over substance and sound bite burns over real arguments and solutions to problems. As a culture we seem to want entertainment and not statesmanship. 😐

[marbel]

14 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Not sure it is enough and not sure everyone would even agree with some definitions of key words. Just look at how the Woke discussion devolved. If we as critical thinkers cannot do it on this board, I have very, very little hope with the rest of uneducated society. 

Well, the topic was what could we as individuals do, and that is what she can do. No one person can do "enough." And as to disagreements... of course there will always be disagreements, including among the most educated. Seriously, right now some of the most highly-educated people I know are being complete jerks and adding to the problem of division and discord, while many who (whom? oh dear) you might consider "uneducated" are communicating with great grace and understanding.  

 

Edited November 7, 2020 by marbel

[frogger]

4 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Good points. Too general a statement. But you may be right. Maybe it is us educated ones that are the problem. Regardelss. we are just doomed. I'm done.

I'm not sure it has anything to do with education level. Wisdom and education do affect each other but they aren't directly correlated. 

[Hilltopmom]

28 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Not sure it is enough and not sure everyone would even agree with some definitions of key words. Just look at how the Woke discussion devolved. If we as critical thinkers cannot do it on this board, I have very, very little hope with the rest of uneducated society. 

Well it might not be enough but it’s what I can do on a daily basis for the kids in front of me everyday for a school year.

I could just stick to teaching math & ELA but while they are with me, I’ll continue to do the best I can to help them grow as people and community members, not just academically.

[Sneezyone]

2 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:

I know. And bless you. I will continue to live as I have always lived trying to help others. I just don't think it will be enough. I wish I had hope. I just don't.

Are you OK? Like, really? I’m about as pessimistic about long-term things as I’ve ever been but I’m quite pragmatic WRT policy. I’m concerned that your view of things is very, very negative when your personal risk is quite low.

Edited November 7, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Frances]

10 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Oh, for me. Yes. I'm white (hence tons of privilege). We have money. We live on a farm that is well stocked. I mean if you mean as far as my property being safe, as far as safe from getting Covid, yes. 

But is that even fair???  What about all my friends in Honduras dealing with the aftermath of Eta? What about the translator in Honduras we've worked with for over a decade who lost his daughter to a stray bullet? What about all of these people dying from Covid with no end in sight? What about the Black men who take their lives in their hands being stopped by police? What about my policeman friends who feel so put down right now? What about all the far right that is trying to kidnap and assassinate people? What about I don't know who they are that are burning cities? And just because he who shall not be named lost the election. We have until the middle of January to deal with inaction/will he leave/etc. Then after that he will continue to spread his poison probably in a tv or talk show. He will egg people on to intimidate and bully.

Yes, I am safe, but why? It isn't fair. Everyone should be as safe as I am and I do not see that ever happening. Yes, I am and will continue to do what I can. But I'm ready to be in heaven where the world will be perfect and everyone will love each other. I'm just really, really, really tired of conflict. I don't do conflict. I  just cannot avoid it anymore. 

Life is not fair and never will be. That is the reality. Each of us can only do so much to improve things, and it sounds like you are involved and working for the change you want to see. I admire you for not just doing the easy thing and going along with the general views of your fellow church members in regards to politics and the virus and for pursuing more education and seeking to understand the lives and experiences of those who are from different backgrounds. Real, lasting change takes time and is very difficult. Don’t lose hope. You are making a difference.

And it sounds like you are pretty self aware about why your upbringing makes you very conflict adverse. A good therapist might really be able to help you reframe your view of conflict and help you be able to handle it better. At least it sounds like you and your husband aren’t in conflict over the major issues right now. Try to focus on and be positive about the good things while working to help change the bad things.

[Sneezyone]

13 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

Oh, for me. Yes. I'm white (hence tons of privilege). We have money. We live on a farm that is well stocked. I mean if you mean as far as my property being safe, as far as safe from getting Covid, yes. 

But is that even fair???  What about all my friends in Honduras dealing with the aftermath of Eta? What about the translator in Honduras we've worked with for over a decade who lost his daughter to a stray bullet? What about all of these people dying from Covid with no end in sight? What about the Black men who take their lives in their hands being stopped by police? What about my policeman friends who feel so put down right now? What about all the far right that is trying to kidnap and assassinate people? What about I don't know who they are that are burning cities? And just because he who shall not be named lost the election. We have until the middle of January to deal with inaction/will he leave/etc. Then after that he will continue to spread his poison probably in a tv or talk show. He will egg people on to intimidate and bully.

Yes, I am safe, but why? It isn't fair. Everyone should be as safe as I am and I do not see that ever happening. Yes, I am and will continue to do what I can. But I'm ready to be in heaven where the world will be perfect and everyone will love each other. I'm just really, really, really tired of conflict. I don't do conflict. I  just cannot avoid it anymore. 

No, it’s not fair, but you cannot internalize and/or take upon yourself someone else’s risk. You can acknowledge it, decry it, try to reduce it, advance the causes and people who might mitigate it, but you seem to be taking their worries upon yourself like the mantle of Christ. This level of despair seems unhealthy. Lord knows I feel the burden of American racism intensely and I don’t believe the electoral outcome will necessarily make my family safer. Still, I’m not yearning for the great beyond. My kids need me, yours need you.

[regentrude]

17 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:

Yes, I am safe, but why? It isn't fair. Everyone should be as safe as I am and I do not see that ever happening. Yes, I am and will continue to do what I can. But I'm ready to be in heaven where the world will be perfect and everyone will love each other. I'm just really, really, really tired of conflict. I don't do conflict. I  just cannot avoid it anymore. 

Saying his gently: yes, the world is not fair and never was. But the level of despair in a variety of your posts, your inability to handle conflict and your desire for that perfect heaven (which may or may not exist) seem to warrant professional help - especially since you suffer from the effects of your dysfunctional upbringing.

Edited November 8, 2020 by regentrude

[Guest]

@Happymomof1 I agree with the others here. The level of hopelessness and despair reflected in numerous posts you've put up in the past several months is beyond being bothered by division and the glacial pace of meaningful change. Your user name is Happymom, so I assume you must have seen yourself as happy at some point in the past but you seem very unhappy here in recent times. Having been through a couple of dark valleys myself, I recognize it. Please, pretty please, do some self care and pursue professional assistance. I'm saying this with all gentleness and concern. You seem really not-okay since this pandemic. 

I wonder if your husband has noticed your level of unhappiness? IIRC, he is a medical doctor. I hope you are not hiding your despair from him. It seems likely that he can help. 

[Ausmumof3]

I don't have much wisdom of my own but I love this quote from Madeleine l’engle.  Actually I think all of her work is incredibly relevant right now.

“Her father said, ‘You know, my dears, the world has been abnormal for so long that we’ve forgotten what it’s like to live in a peaceful and reasonable climate.  If there is to be any peace or reason, we have to create it on our own hearts and homes.’

‘Even at a time like this?’ Meg asked…

‘Especially at a time like this,’ her mother said gently.”

– Madeleine L’Engle, in A Swiftly Turning Planet, 1978.

I also like the bible and I know that in the same book there’s “blessed are the peacemakers” and Jesus turning over the tables of the money changers.  There’s a time for each thing and wisdom is knowing which time you live in.

[Guest]

On 11/6/2020 at 7:09 PM, Dreamergal said:

One of the things I have been struggling is how to respond when it seems like friends make a comment about something, actually rail against something and not take it personally because it applies to me. 

An example would mean someone saying something about "those immigrants who come here and take our jobs" when I am an immigrant and I have one of those jobs, even part time. So I smile and say "you mean like me", they are immediately apologetic, their face falls and they say "you are not that anymore". The thing though is I am that and when friends especially say something like that, it is hard not to take it personally. 

 I do not want people to walk around egg shells around me, hurt feelings and I have refrained from speaking up before. But more and more now I lean towards speaking up because it puts a face for the "others" when they fear it. But they do not see me as that scary thing because I am a friend. Perhaps it will show that things that are used to fear monger by othering are just people, different people, even their own friends. 

I think that is exactly what you should say. They are apologetic, most likely, because they are embarrassed and just got reminded that "these people, these immigrants who steal our jobs" are actual people, like you, standing there right in front of them. You've just put a human face on the dehumanized image they were trying to keep in mind. I think that's a good thing.

This whole societal narrative rests partially on this problem. The harold of division is first dehumanizing others and pigeon-holing them. As an immigrant yourself and a POC, you have an opportunity to show those people (who say that in your presence) that "immigrants" are people like you. 

Edited November 8, 2020 by Quill
Removed a part because I felt it was not my story to tell.

[Guest]

The thing is, it shouldn’t just be on the immigrants to send that message that immigrants are people first and citizenship paperwork way, way, down the line. It shouldn’t just be on POC to send the message that POC are people first. It shouldn’t be on LGBQT+ to send the message that they are people first,  not who they love/sleep with or what pronouns they use. 
 

inevitably, it ends up being the responsibility of those harmed to explain and teach. And it is at best frustrating and at worst traumatic. For me, trying to explain the reality of middle trimester pregnancy complications and that, yes, sometimes a woman’s life IS at risk, and that legislation to restrict abortion can have the unforeseen consequences of increased injury and death to women in such situations is necessary, because few other people will speak for me unless they or a close family member are affected. And maybe they really don’t know. But it’s something that ends up bringing back the pain and trauma and fear of literally the worst experience in my life. One that still causes physical pain almost daily, and that has dramatically shaped my family’s life. One that changed me to the degree that my mother says that it sometimes feels like they lost me. That’s a heavy burden to relive when the other thinks they are having a casual conversation and is bringing up a topic that, after all,no sane person could possibly disagree with. 


 

 

[SKL]

On 11/6/2020 at 7:08 AM, hshibley said:

I think we need move civic involvement. The more people work together to improve their community the more we will be unified as a country regardless of political affiliation. Joining League of Women Voters, delivering Home Delivered Meals, volunteering with Boy Scouts or Girl Scout, PTA, food banks etc. gets us out of our silos and working together. Working towards a goal together that is not defined by Democrats vs Republicans let’s people get to know each other in a more neutral environment. I think the death of civic involvement as a natural default for adults is a major contributor to this us vs them attitude. 

Interestingly, one of the best experiences I've had with this has been working at the polls in the 2020 election.  Everyone knew everyone else's political affiliation, and yet there was no animosity.  We were all working together with the goal of making sure every citizen was able to cast a vote that reflected their conscience.

I guess this does require a belief that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and personal priorities (within the law of course).  But that shouldn't be such a hard thing to accomplish, should it?

[SKL]

I also think it helps to remember that disagreement is a key to progress.  It isn't a bad thing for our country nor for our individual lives.  What's the point of a democracy if everyone is supposed to agree on all the important things?

I think there have been some times, people, and movements that were better at developing and embracing the ability to meaningfully discuss differences.  Perhaps we could learn from them and move the world forward that way.

I do think there will always be some people who can't get comfortable in that kind of discussion, and so they should be free to exit it, but without shutting it down for those who can move it forward.

[Sneezyone]

6 minutes ago, SKL said:

Interestingly, one of the best experiences I've had with this has been working at the polls in the 2020 election.  Everyone knew everyone else's political affiliation, and yet there was no animosity.  We were all working together with the goal of making sure every citizen was able to cast a vote that reflected their conscience.

I guess this does require a belief that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and personal priorities (within the law of course).  But that shouldn't be such a hard thing to accomplish, should it?

To the bolded, you would think. Sadly, no, there is a significant and vocal plurality of people who do not believe the franchise belongs to all Americans and that each of their votes/voices should count. Enacting the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act would be a good faith start.