Reasoned, civil, discourse?

I had an illuminating conversation in the lunch room at work the other day:
A bunch of us were shooting the breeze. And somehow (I forget the context) someone observed how stupid people are. It was shortly after the election and I opined that it wasn't necessary to look any further than the results of the election to demonstrate that. One of the people there took offense to that - rightly so: I'd proven that, regardless of the speck that may or may not have been in anyone else's eye, I was sporting a beam in my own. And I had been whining (again) about reasoned, civil discourse - the lack thereof. Oops.
I do indeed think that the majority of voters were mistaken; I disagree with them - but that's a whole different way of saying it, isn't it? It doesn't demonize - and who responds well to being demonized? And I re-remembered a bit of wisdom taught me by a college friend: Perhaps the people who voted "wrong" didn't have all the info. Perhaps they were too busy trying figure out how to feed their kids the next day. Or pay for a hospital bill. Or whatever. I've also come to understand that when I say "I just don't understand!", it's possibly because _I_ don't understand; the fault may be my own. I do think we voted the wrong folks in, but I think it behooves us all to be civil and open-minded about it - all of us, especially those of us hoping to convince the country to make some changes. Not in the overly-PC, touchy-feely way, but in the we-screwed-up-and-obviously-need-all-the-help-we-can-get way.

No comments: