I was at a restaurant a couple of months ago and couldn't help but overhear an argument between a husband and wife at the next table. And it wasn't because I have such great hearing (5 years in the military took care of that), it was because they were being loud.
Their argument was about Trump, and more specifically, illegal immigration.
The wife was vehemently against Trump and the husband moderately supportive. There was nothing revelationary about either of their arguments, they were the same ones you've heard a million times. And, to be frank, I think I could have walked circles around either, or both.
But that's besides the point.
What struck me about the conversation was the contempt - not that they had towards each others arguments, but towards each other for having them. The wife, in particular, had a tendency of making ad hominem attacks: The snippet that really caught my ear was,"Well, if you support a Border Wall, then you're a racist."
With due respect to those against a Border Wall, that's a salacious assertion.
According to the Merrian-Webster Dictionary:
Racism:
> a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> a political or social system founded on racism
> racial prejudice or discrimination
But the husband was arguing none of those things, and kept saying so. He was arguing that the flow of illegal aliens streaming into the country had to be stopped, and that he did not believe that that could be accomplished without a physical barrier.
Whether you agree or disagree is besides the point. That is not a racist argument. Indeed, it has nothing to do with race. It has to do with people illegally entering the country and desiring to stop it.
The wife would have none of it.
Further, she argued, using terms like, illegal alien was itself racist. The husband responded that illegal alien was the proper legal terminology, and that it was written into hundreds of laws and regulations and was even used by Supreme Court. And, he continued, attempts to introduce alternative phrases like undocumented worker were rhetorical tricks used by activists in an effort to reframe the debate, by de-emphasizing the illegal aspect.
On and on.
At some point during the meal, I recall thinking, "Well there's another marriage destined for divorce court."
Some time later, it struck me that this was probably happening all over the country. A bit of Googling convinced me that I was correct. Moreover, these same culture war arguments are occurring in the UK, Canada, Australia and most of the countries of Western Europe.
Are they all Trump's fault too?
The manner in which we engage in debate has become toxic. The willingness to attribute moral turpitude because of political difference is not only divisive, it's destructive.
I think it's time we dust off some old texts concerning Rules of Debate and the Formulation of Logical Argument.
Did you: Up-Vote? Follow? Comment?
PerPerhaps you haven't read, "Ancient The Curse," in my Intro Post.
Don't think you're safe just because you're not a whale.
Don't screw around with Black Magic!
Poetry can make wonderful gifts
Visit QuillFire's Zazzle Store
You are good at spelling out the problems and I agree with you, nobody knows how to even talk with others anymore - never mind debate.
Maybe babies should have a tiny operation so that the next generations can only communicate through texting?
@arthur.grafo,
Alas, it's not the means of communication, it's the meaning of it.
Perhaps I'm getting old, but I distinctly remember being good friends with people who didn't share all my political beliefs. We're reading too much into everything these days ... everything has symbolic meaning.
My experiences are more along the line of eyes turning glassy and people walking away, if I tell them something they don't want to hear. It does not even occur to them that they should try to argue their own beliefs.
Since you enjoy poetry, I am curious as to how you will react to some of the poetry here. I've found many attempts by people whose first language is something else, not English. I find that some I can barely understand what they are trying to say, but now and then I come across a unique little gem, a way of saying something or expressing a thought or feeling, that actually gives me the feeling the person is gifted.
@arthur.grafo,
Even when their first language is English, I often have a hard time understanding what poets are saying. :)
"Post-modernism" (actually a political ideology) changed art.
LIBERATE YOURSELVES! Throw off the shackles. No more rules! No more form! Anything goes! No ones right, no ones wrong. Everything and everyone is equally beautiful. Do you want to be an artist ... just say so, and you are!
Today, anything involving "words," that is not a "grammatically and syntactically correct sentence" (i.e. prose), is now being called "poetry."
Most poets are familiar with what Robert Frost had to say about free verse, "Writing free verse is like playing tennis without a net."
I prefer the sarcasm of G.K. Chesterton, “..."vers libre," (free verse) or nine-tenths of it, is not a new metre any more than sleeping in a ditch is a new school of architecture.”
In fairness, I've read some free verse that I find pleasurable, but in general, I much prefer verse.
I think this post could benefit from your contribution. Or, at least, from a link suggested over here to your own.
https://steemit.com/life/@sumatranate/united-states-or-the-divided-states
My short answer is that WE are. We are responsible for our own individual actions. But does the (lowered) level, the crass level, of political discourse have an influence on us? Yes, it does. Or rather, it can. It's up to us how much we let it inform our opinions, though. That's the problem. We let others tell us how to think, and what to think. We let our particular brand of news (right side or left side) define our enemies for us and tell us who to hate and give us the idea that we should hate at all. And I'm not simply advocating for peace and love and that we all hug it out. I would advocate for peace; who in their right mind wouldn't? But I think we also, more than simply, need to debate. And debate can get hot. But that's the point. It works when done right. When it devolves into hot-headed, red-eyed, vein-popping ad-hominem (hyphenated-words for angry things) then it does not.
I'd love to see some of that debate here on steemit. It seems like I've wandered into different camps in my perusing. But I'd love to see people begin talking across party lines. I think it would be great. And possibly really beneficial, at least on a personal level for a lot of us. I want to know what people are really thinking. I think you write well enough that you could be a part of starting that.
I'm trying to read through to your newer posts, but the one I'm on I've had to pause and think on for a minute. It's that good. I'd say #2 on my list of favorites seen here so far. I'll get to it. Just thought I'd link this reference over to you.
I got only to read the poem, @quillfire, because I was brought here by another post of yours... I didn't read your explanation, but oh how sorry I am...! How can it be, how can it be!?
(Your mom from California, your dad from Texas, and you from Canada? Wow...)
I see some hope at those last lines... Did they really split up? Did they manage to steer the ship and take it to good-port? I hope so... I cannot believe that Trump would do this to a family! So sad... I was so against him when he first showed up; I didn't like him, I thought he was such an ignorant... But then, when he began being VERY vocal about enemies of freedom that I don't what to mention here, then I began to see potential in him... I started to like him, A LOT!
Nowadays, I don't know, I still like him, and I still believe he will fight for what's right (especially abroad) and make his words come true, but the in-fighting he has caused, wow! That is bad medicine by all accounts...
@dialsamai,
I just came across this comment (many months after-the-fact). No, the poem itself is purely fictional, art created in service of making a point. That said, modern-day politics is dividing families like I've never seen before. As the poem argues, people need to take chill-pill.
Quill
I just came across this poem!
Due to stalking your late response.
Many times my "poetry " has been interpreted as autobiographical... Sometimes it draws on... stuff .
I'm glad you responded. I think it is one of my favourite posts. Fantastic poem and commentary. 😊
Thanks Quill-Man.
I can't resteem of up vote it, but I'll hit some recent comments in its honour.
@girlbeforemirror,
Love ya, darling.
Quill