An Alternative to Political Yelling
A Modest Proposal for Both Sides
I am weary of political yelling, both from the other side and from mine.
Perhaps there is a better solution than yelling.... even in politics.
Instead of yelling, a relative and I have been holding weekly conversations about politics. We are on different ends of the political spectrum, and believe it or not our conversations are civil and friendly. We continue to like each other, and we even laugh together. When we finish, we still like each other.
For personal reasons, we need to take a short break from those online video conversations, but our goal is to resume after a brief time away. I am actually looking forward to doing that!
To narrow our topic, we usually respond to an article we have both read. We take turns selecting one.
The article for our last meeting was especially beneficial. It was from Tangle, which presents two sides of a political issue and then the moderate editor's personal take. We both agreed it was refreshing to discuss something that presented both sides in a calm and factual tone.
There were paragraphs that we both agreed with!
At the end of the conversation we agreed on something else: we think these conversations between people of different political persuasions are going to be crucial for the long-term political health or recovery of health for our country.
We agreed that both sides are currently getting input from our own political silos and that is not healthy for either side.
Our suggestion: pick an acquaintance or friend you trust, but perhaps not someone you see every day, and not someone with anger problems. Ask if they are willing to risk trying a political conversation. Explain that your goal is mutual understanding and a civil conversation.
Pick an article that reveals what both sides are saying. And then listen to each other respectfully and try to find something, along the way, you can agree on. At the end you can decide whether to continue or stop. That way it is not a huge risk. But, yes, it is a risk.
When my relative and I began this last fall, he suggested we have a four-way discussion and include one additional person from each side. I told him that option terrified me, but I was willing to try it with two people. I am still not ready to risk more than a two-person conversation. And the listening is hard work for both of us. We try to avoid interrupting each other, but I for one, don't always succeed.
My relative and I have found two online resources that present both sides of an issue: Tangle and Flip Side. Both of them have either free subscriptions and or paid subscriptions.
The links are below:
Tangle: https://www.readtangle.com/
Flip Side: https://www.theflipside.io
If you know of more news sites that present both sides, please tell me in the comments.
And if you try this, I'd love to hear about it also. I really think it is essential in order take steps away from long-term angry and yelling partisanship, regardless of which party is in control.
Carol
Having civil discourse is a sign that we acknowledge ALL people are made in God's image and therefore deserve some respect. It does not mean we need to agree on all issues.
I enjoy a civil conversation with someone who has a different view point than myself. I often am able to see things in a different light after hearing how the other person may be affected by a situation. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them, but being able to better understand why they have the opinions that they do help me to see things from their perspective, respect them and have empathy for them.