The Maelstrom of Violence

[Eric the Green]

(07-14-2017, 12:03 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(07-10-2017, 11:37 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: It lessens frustration to give up trying to convince someone who will not listen. For example, I will not listen to appeals to the supposed sanity and rationality of the NRA bosses. So, might as well move on to something I might listen to, or at least read. So it is with red folk and what goes against their ideologies.

Sometimes I go with the secondary objective, which is just to illustrate how extreme partisans will sometimes not listen to anything that conflicts with their world view.  You make a wonderful illustration, and at least will admit it at times.  Many a partisan would rather go into insult or silence mode than admit their perspective flawed.  Getting other extreme partisans to watch their own commitment to the extremes isn't easy, but they might hopefully begin to wonder.

At times....??? But... my perspective probably isn't flawed! It's been considerable thought and years in the making, after all. Not perfect though; always more to learn. World views though, are more set than new information. I listen enough to all sides, political, philosophical, religious, to know what the world views are in our world; that is my business to know them.

"Extreme partisan," again, is likely not a bad thing in a society that is tilted so far in one, very-harmful direction that every thoughtful person opposes. And again, not necessarily a bad thing, given that "partisan" is the wrong word anyway for many "extreme partisans." My views, for example, have nothing to do with honing and clinging to a party line. I made that point before. I diverge from that when warranted, and stay with it when warranted. My views are based on reality, and on hope for the best.

It's a practical, political need today, to support Democrats, and particularly progressive Democrats, for the sake of the country, despite the fact that Democratic politicians too are frequently less than ideal or adequate for various reasons, as the case may be. The need now, in this 4T era, is for the progressive Democratic side to win. Not for reconciliation or compromise. The only "compromise" possible with the right wing today, would itself be too far to the right. And things are not going well in this fight.

And I admit that, and have even predicted that, in a fluid 4T situation like ours, what may emerge is an entirely new party system.

But if I were a politician, I would do my best to work out the best possible legislation, even if this might involve some compromise. And sometimes, at least, I support politicians who can do this. I think it's possible, if ideologies and fixed ideas are less tightly clung to. Usually though, this compromise happens today in less-critically important fields where both sides can agree, like veterans affairs. In economic/fiscal and social-cultural issues today, willingness to seek real common ground is often absent. Instead what we hear is, "your policies are harmful," vs. "we share the same goal, we just have a different way to get there" (meaning, NO way to get there).