Each of us is at least 75 percent responsible for how others treat us. If they are disdainful and we do not respond in a way that causes them to change their tone and attitude, then we essentially encourage them to continue to berate us.
This is what Americans do when they listen to shock jocks and others whose larger purpose in life is to draw attention and wealth to themselves by spewing hatred and lies.
When we don't expect support for assertions, anyone can convince us of anything. They foul our environment with vitriol seeping downward to our children where bullying is becoming more and more prevalent.
We can choose to extricate ourselves from the URPs (unwanted repetitive episodes) of vile talk. And expect the same from our leaders. First, we must notice that we're in such destructive patterns -- that we're part of the problem. Only then is it possible to take the actions necessary to end them. Does this mean doing away with criticism? It does not. Democracy depends on constructive criticism to avoid dangerous excesses. It does mean honestly distinguishing between passionate disagreements and personal attacks. It means calling on those who by distortions of fact endeavor to turn political opponents into enemies
On Meet The Press Sunday, the focus was on ways to make politics more civil. Yet, those interviewed did not directly blame shock jocks who are spreading hatred for a living. These congressmen and senators were mistaking such omission as a form of civility -- keeping the dialogue pure. In so doing, however, they abdicated their 75 percent responsibility for bringing about change. They were essentially saying, "Let's be more polite to each other" rather than "Let's bring to task those people whose bombastic, odious, contemptuous words lower us all and elicit hatred and revenge for fabricated offense."
A simple agreement to be more civil will not work for long in the House or Senate. Members need to confront their contributions to the incivility and pathological politics that has become the norm -- even if that contribution has only been one of tolerance.
Our country's politicians are caught up in URPs that are not about to go away merely by agreeing to disagree. Family members in therapy do not suddenly turn around their dysfunctional patterns because they want things to improve. It's a step-by-step process. In Washington, this will require reminding each other that spewing hatred as well as praising and catering to those who do -- especially to get votes -- is a despicable practice.
Learning to call people on their hateful rhetoric is a required first step. Otherwise it's all simply a temporary papering over of ugliness that will surely show through again in short order.
For the rest of us, breaking the URP requires refusing to listen to shock jocks whose hateful rants lack any semblance of credible support. Our own URPs, being entertained by hatred, contribute to continued vile discourse. Each of us has a role to play in bringing about greater civility -- at least 75 percent responsibility. Doing so has little to do with politeness and far more to do with refusing to engage in gratuitous, hateful hyperbole and rejecting overtly those who do.
Kathleen also blogs at bardscove (www.bardscove.com) and comebacksatwork and is on Twitter. @comebackskid
Absolutely. Just the other day someone was so rude in the bus station that I felt I had to publicly tell them how rude they were being. Their repsonse was to say that I was being rude for telling them that. And I thought "If it's rude to tell someone they're being rude, how will rude people ever be corrected?"
It's not rude to point out someone else's rudeness.
It's not racist to point out someone else's racism.
It's not ignorant to point out someone else's ignorance.
Mike
Well this does not rise to the definition of "Shock Jock". But further than that you're going to have to show some of these exaggerations and lies, merely saying so is not enough. Same goes for Fox.
You do not understand "Shock Jock" "Shock jocks also tend to push the envelope of decency in their market, ... show a lack of regard for communications regulations... regarding content. ...American broadcasters have strict policies against content that is likely to draw indecency forfeitures, and air personalities are often contractually obligated to avoid broadcasting such content. Popular envelope-pushing areas for shock jocks include sexual (especially kinky) and/or scatalogical (toilet humour) topics, or just unabashed innuendo. Many shock jocks have been fired as a result of such punishments as regulatory fines, loss of advertisers, or simply social and political outrage. ... Shock jocks in the United States have been censored under additional pressure from the United States government since the introduction of the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, ..."
You are unable to distinguish between editorial and news! Nor do you even understand "shock value".
It is clear you do not listen, probably would not understand if you did. But How do you know what you say if you do not listen.
Also means recognizing that we can't survive as a nation in angry isolation, only communicating with like minds. Remember united we stand, divided we fall?
It's easy to see ugliness in right-wing vitriol. Suspicion and denigration of anyone different. That old reptilian brain has its defense mechanisms on full alert. Attack those in its grip and you'll reinforce their stance-- it's either win or lose. To be on the winning side and not a victim means supporting aggressive bullies.
But how many times on Huffpo has someone denigrated working people as a group for voting against their own interests? Or smugly put down spiritual beliefs? Or attacked the stupidity of the majority in any number of ways? All guaranteed to be perceived as the intellectual elite proclaiming itself above those outside its ivory towers. Where is the concern for those less educated, for those with less opportunity?
At least let's remember we're mammals. Who nurse the young and care for their group. And who, like wolves or elephants, thrive because of intelligent elders.
Or maybe we'll realize we have more in our evolutionary potential-- intellectually and spiritually. The surest sign of which is a positive confidence. Refusing fear and anger. Say it, act it: we're progressives because we know love.
How about cooperation and embracing both ideas to mutual satisfaction--
or dissatisfaction as the case may be? Both ideas have merit, but need not be exclusionary.
How? There are tons of blogs and sites like this where you can vocalize your opinion, there are plenty of talk radio stations you can call into, you can email, write, or call any of your representatives. There are more places than ever to vocalize.
"The reality is that our nation is completely polarized by two ideologies. One believes in the responsibility of the individual, the other ideology believes that the federal government is the final arbiter of all things."
I disagree with this, politics is not and has never been black and white. Not everybody believes that the federal gov't should do everything or nothing. Most of believe that the federal gov't has a role to play and differ on what exactly that role should be. I have been accused many times of being "liberal" in my views yet I do not believe that the Federal Gov't should be the final arbiter of all things. This statement is just factually not true.
There is a problem when people frame politics in a "Us vs Them" way, it becomes easy to see "the other side" as evil or bad. Most Americans, regardless of political persuasion, want the same things, we just disagree on how to do those things.
I believe that we are all 100% responsible for what is going on in this country and agree with Reardon we need to take a stand and hold the "shock jocks" responsible for their ways of dissenting through hatred and superficial jargon.
Going deeper, we do not teach conflict resolution skills in most of our schools and most of us, as indicated by the senior leaders I am with today, never learned that at home.
We need to teach this vital skill, more of an art and a craft, beginning in elementary school and at the core is the following message "telling the truth is not spilling your guts".
Hopefully thre treagedy in Tucson will be a major wake up call for our nation.
Sylvia Lafair author, "Don't Bring It to Work"