 |
| Photo credit: Photo by QwirkSilver on Flickr |
After the 2004 US presidential election, I was shocked and depressed. (Now, whether you agree with my politics or not, stay with me. As with so many things with me, it will all come back around.) I couldn't believe that after all of George W. Bush's dumbassery, after the way he'd frittered away the goodwill of the world and gotten us enmeshed in an endless, costly and pointless war in Iraq, after all his lies, that Americans were duped into handing the country over to him for another four years. The 2000 election I could discount -- after all, he hadn't even won the popular vote -- but this? Ok, John Kerry, not the greatest choice, but really, a monkey could do a better job than Bush. Why were so many Americans so freaking stupid? Why were they so blind to the facts? (At this point, my few conservative readers should be burning to tell me why I am wrong and my liberal readers will be saying, "Yeah, sing it, sister!")
In a desperate effort to understand how to get through to those boneheaded conservatives, I read Don't Think of an Elephant
Now, whatever you may think of that theory, it finally helped clarify for me why it was so hard to talk to my conservative friends and relatives. There we were going on at each other trying to marshal facts or shoot down the details of each other's arguments, trying to painstakingly explain what it was that was wrong about our opponents' positions, when the problem was that we were standing on two different (unexamined) foundations all along. We were starting from different places and were never going to understand each other until we stopped talking about the details of weapons of mass destruction and started talking about our beliefs at a much deeper level.
Conservatives weren't stupid or boneheadly unable to understand the facts, they were making decisions in a way that was completely in line with their values and beliefs, just as I was. What I saw as a fact, they saw as speculation and lies and vice versa, because each of us had different ways of arriving at our truth and different sources we trusted (or saw as suspect). And all of this came down to deeply held, unchangeable (at least by other people) core beliefs about life, the universe and everything. So, that initial "you're wrong" or "sing it, sister" you experienced away back in the first paragraph didn't come from an agreement about the specifics of George W. Bush's actual dumbassery (or lack thereof), but rather from the resonance (or lack thereof) of your core beliefs with mine.
Since this revelation, when I've disagreed with other people I try (not always successfully) to stop and remind myself that there is some the core belief on which we differ. (This was one of the things that inspired me to write my Views into my Room post.) And if I have built, or am building, a relationship with the person with whom I disagree, I'll work with them to figure out what that problematic core belief is. Of course, it's not always easy to find, because those beliefs are so woven into the fabric of our being that we forget they're there and get lost arguing over the specifics of a situation instead. At times I can see where I differ from someone else quite easily, and at others, it takes quite a bit of stumbling around and digging here and there to figure it out. (Unfortunately, that stumbling and digging can be a dangerous, and sometimes inadvertently hurtful, process.)
On my recent post on Silda Spitzer, several people (Vicarious Rising and Mantra on this blog and blue milk on my other) commented that they wondered if Silda Spitzer was doing what was right for her or what she felt she should do. And I thought, "Ah, but of course she was doing what was right for her. Even if she was bullied into it, it was right for her!"
Now if you feel the stirrings within you (as I suspect some of you will) of "what?! that's wrong!" then rest assured you and I see the world a different way, and there's no point in arguing over Silda Spitzer, because what is really at issue is the heart of what we believe about God and free will and human nature and the nature of reality and how the universe works. And maybe it is time to tell you (pulling threads together) what my God is (rather than what my God is not) and how I see myself (and Silda Spitzer and everyone else) fitting in to the scheme of the universe. I'll see what I can do for you tomorrow, with a minimum of stumbling and digging if I can.
But the stumbling and digging are the beauty of it all.
I find the stumbling and digging wonderful fun on my own -- not so much when I'm doing it with other people.
No offense, mpj, but if she was bullied into it is the worst reason of all. How could that be right for her? As a victim of abuse as a child, I find this thought completely horrible and really cannot see my way around to how anyone being bullied into doing something they don't want to do is right for them.
Vicarious, exactly. More tomorrow.
When I know someone, it is easier for me to be okay with disagreeing with them. It's those crazy Republicans I don't know that make me nuts and curse and all that.
Here's to allowing for people to come from a difference in the many meanings of the phrase.
I have to this daily in my job since I teach ESL and my students come from all over the world. I often don't see the world the way they do, but we get along and learn anyway.
May Silda be okay. And you too.
"Dumbassery" is a great new word.
So who are you voting for in this election?
Nail on head. I don't like to argue about religion or politics. It makes no sense at all. It never goes full circle and someone ends up getting hurt. Call me a "softy," but I'm not all into the controversy crap, ya know?
yes, "dumbassery" is a fantasic word. I'm going to use it first chance I get.
Like the good codependent (that I am not, shut up), I feel like I made the shit list (but... wha?).
But, I know you will teach me differently. I humbly await your tutelage... In fact, I can already see it coming.
Dumbassery should be used all the time. By far the most useful word. As for understanding both sides, I myself am extremely opinionated and stubborn. But i have learned to listen to the other sides of things that i actually have someone thinking i am conservative. (ummm, hello, artist from NYC that is gay friendly and hates censorship..... how is that conservative?) Anywho, I do try to listen more now, and play devil's advocate. But really all should know that I am right and everyone who doesn't think like me is wrong... hehe
Mantra, I am no Nixon (or Bush)-like keeper of a shit list of counter views -- but even if I were, you'd never make the shit list, my love.
He he, Stag! You're right, of course.
Pat, should I really say on my everyone has their point of view post? Oh, ok, this year in the primaries it's Hillary.
when I finally came to understand this, that those I disagreed with and gave my energy to in trying to convince, actaully had very fundamentals differences in perspective on much deeper issues, it helped in some way.
I no longer bothered to try to persuade or make others understand. it made me much happier.
Me too, bella. I've stopped (for the most part) trying to persuade people with different viewpoints. (Although I won't say I've quit entirely -- I love talking politics and I feel very passionately, so it's hard to stop!) But I do (particularly if I'm invested in a relationship with that person) try to get to the underlying difference and to understand where the other person is coming from and explain where I'm coming from.
Such a low point that time was ... I remember it so well (after the 2004 election).
I think conservatives believe that SOME people (those not like them, really) are inherently bad at the core (but not others). That's a big statement for me since that is my biggest problem with hard-core conservatives.
Great post. Food for thought, for sure.
Trusting God as I know it, too.
Very interesting. I studied some Lakoff at University (my degree is in linguistics) and I just might have to read that book now