Topic: Who will try to unify? Can it improve? Will it?
msharmony's photo
Fri 03/01/19 10:48 AM
Edited by msharmony on Fri 03/01/19 10:49 AM
Between bias on the left and hatred/violence on the right, who is trying/will try to lead with a goal of unifying instead of dividing?

Is it only going to go to further and further extremes? Or can we pull it together somehow?


Freedom comes with responsibility, how do we encourage 'moral' responsibilities towards each other, our families, our communities, our country men and women? I believe too much of a good thing can be detrimental. I really wonder how we maintain individual freedoms without stepping on one another to do it?

I'm inspired to wonder where we are headed as I watch the coverage between Hasson and Smollet, one a plan of hateful violence and the other a plan of hateful dishonesty. Is it maybe the contrast between what is in our INDIVIDUAL best interests and what is in our overall collective best interests that will be our complete undoing? Can we/will we ever pull it back in and get it together?


sigh. The highly revered (by many) 'founding fathers' had faults of their own that they sought to improve upon by amending certain parts of their founding document with time. Do you think they would be wondering why it has been so long since we have tried or believed we should do the same?

I dont know if there is AN answer, so to speak. I just hope we can at least start the dialog and collaborate on improving some of the sad paths we are turning down.




no photo
Fri 03/01/19 12:23 PM
Not until you stop putting the knock on Trump.

oldkid46's photo
Fri 03/01/19 02:18 PM
You raise one of the most important issues of our time. If we do not find ways to come closer together and understand our personal issues, eventually it will result in serious, violent clashes. We have already seen the start of it here and at a greater extent in Europe. Here are some things I think could help:
1. Get control over the media and social platforms.
2. Follow some of the libertarian principles where government supports people living their lives in freedom and their own way as long as they don't interfere with the rights of others to do the same.
3. Limit the areas of life where government has an influence.
4. Force a more uniform exchange of ideas in institutions of higher learning.
5. Start some kind of cultural exchanges with different areas of our country. Perhaps with younger people like we do with foreign exchange students. That could eventually be expanded to adults.
6. Change the rules in Congress so that the minority party has more power. Require 20% minority support for any legislation to pass.

We will never all agree on much of anything and that is fine. What we can't allow is some institution forcing all of us to follow the rules some subset of the whole makes. Parts of the constitution and the bill of rights were written to protect the minority from the actions of the majority; we have forgotten those principles and are again trying to force the majority view on the minority.

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/01/19 03:21 PM

You raise one of the most important issues of our time. If we do not find ways to come closer together and understand our personal issues, eventually it will result in serious, violent clashes. We have already seen the start of it here and at a greater extent in Europe. Here are some things I think could help:
1. Get control over the media and social platforms.
2. Follow some of the libertarian principles where government supports people living their lives in freedom and their own way as long as they don't interfere with the rights of others to do the same.
3. Limit the areas of life where government has an influence.
4. Force a more uniform exchange of ideas in institutions of higher learning.
5. Start some kind of cultural exchanges with different areas of our country. Perhaps with younger people like we do with foreign exchange students. That could eventually be expanded to adults.
6. Change the rules in Congress so that the minority party has more power. Require 20% minority support for any legislation to pass.

We will never all agree on much of anything and that is fine. What we can't allow is some institution forcing all of us to follow the rules some subset of the whole makes. Parts of the constitution and the bill of rights were written to protect the minority from the actions of the majority; we have forgotten those principles and are again trying to force the majority view on the minority.


good ideas which beg the question, how much of media and government are influencing the people and how much are the people the ones influencing media and government?

The balance suggests that all parts play a role, so can we tackle them simultaneously? and if not, how do we know which roles to start with?

oldkid46's photo
Fri 03/01/19 08:22 PM
I believe people are influencing the media; it is a race for ratings. In a democracy, all we can force is a disclaimer when some media outlet mixes opinion or judgement into the news. Something such as "This news site is biased in their explanation of the news". Opinion needs to be clearly identified while actual news reporting has no opinion or bias.

As for government, we need to hold our elected representatives to a higher standard of honesty. Unfortunately, that will get them challenged in their primaries and cost them their election. That is where requiring minority participation in passing legislation comes in. One thing it does is give majority legislators an answer to why they supported some minority provisions in the legislation. "I either gave a little and got something or I didn't and got nothing".

Tom4Uhere's photo
Fri 03/01/19 09:42 PM
Are you actually looking for unification, or agreement?

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/01/19 10:47 PM
Edited by msharmony on Fri 03/01/19 10:49 PM

Are you actually looking for unification, or agreement?


working together to move forward what we can agree on, while being united in respecting common goals even when details are not agreed to

the art of agreeing to disagree and learning to build upon the agreement instead of dwell on the disagreement, for example, inspires unity