Thoughts On Polarization and Personalization

I am having difficulty getting this web log started today. And as usual, I will blame my children. I have had three different attempts and three different approaches to try to transition my thoughts from Monday's blog to today's entry. I have tried to be "smooth" and smart and funny and learned and informative and...you get the picture. So as commonplace for myself, I will just jump into this like it is a pool full of cold water (at least I threw in a tired, old simile for a few redemptive points)

Monday I wrote about conducting ourselves in a manner that won't polarize our fellows. I think that we could solve more of the World's problems and our own civic issues if we didn't push each other into a corner with our rhetoric and party platforms. We do this in our schools, our governments, and our churches. Too many times we have a predisposed bias based on "gut feelings" or " personal history", and that bias causes differences between people to become full blown rifts, schisms, and divisions. Then throw in more of the human element of personality and we have become polarized. We may have started out 5 degrees apart but now 50 degrees in seperation exists due to our stubborness, anger, ignorance, competetiveness, so forth and so on.

Now we are polarized. And the first casualty of this polarization is individuality. We lose sight of individuals and begin to view people with differences or opposing views as something other than human. We know that they are people, but at this point it is scientific not personal. Add in the factor that we don't take time to nurture our own, close-knit relationships, much less the relationships we have with strangers, and our enemies become soul-less statistcs or just another face on the news.

Now I'm not suggesting that we try to have a personal relationship with everyone we see or hear of. I'm not even suggesting that we "do lunch" with people that we disagree with or that we try to make friends with our enemies, so to speak. I do suggest that we step back and remember that every politician, lawmaker, celebrity, athlete, and face in the news, is just as human as our own children are to ourselves. And while we never expect all people to agree with our children, we do wish that they will always get a "fair shake" by everyone. But a fair shake doesn't mean that one is above accountability. I think this overall mindset would diminish our impersonal view of the people we find ourselves diametrically opposed to. And that would go a long way towards treating others as we would like to be treated.

I think that was one of the successes of the Saddleback Civil Forum; it cast both candidates in a more personal light. At least it did for me. And that helps me to temper my attitude and my words against those on the opposite end of the spectrum than I am.

But tempering our words and actions should not lead to any type of universalism or political correctness. This will only lead to our dehumanization by leading us all towards a common and grey middle ground. We should stand on, support, and fight for our personal convictions. Morality and ethics should never be surrendered, even in the name of peace. But we should be sure that our convictions are personal, not handed down ideas or borrowed notions from a party or platform. To be seen as human and personal, we should behave as such. We must be in a position to extend as well as accept such treatment.

I would like to continue and get into the interaction and dynamics of opposing views, but I need to work on my relationship with my kids for a few minutes. I do plan on continuing along these lines Friday. I feel there are "things" we can all glean from this topic. But for now "twenty questions" and "book time" is more important.