I agree that retreating to the echo chamber is a bad idea (no matter what side it’s on). I think if we actually sat down and had a conversation about the issues, we’d find we have a lot more in common than the media makes it seem. I have many friends on both sides of it (some of whom are open to it) and have had several meaningful conversations about the issues (even coming to an agreement on solutions).
My greatest concern is the disingenuous way our government on both sides of the aisle casually lie about what they intend to do and what their political opponents are doing. I think the greatest failure of our political system is the level of transparency they are willing to offer and the use of fear to motivate people to stand with them in their position. It is obvious that both sides cannot be right. And I refuse to ‘pick a side’ to stand with people who are not accustomed to either transparency or moderation. I want neither a fascist state nor a communist paradise. I don’t want a ‘tribe’ because the nature of tribalism is to be in conflict with other ‘tribes’ who disagree or hold different ideologies. This, in a day and age when everyone getting along and working for common sense goals that benefit the greatest number of people would seem like the most reasonable way to go. I would settle for voting for an honest candidate…but they are not very popular these days. So as usual, I will vote for the lesser of two evils.
Good Lord Bridget, where do you find these people! This woman apparently doesn't understand that a person's tribe is their family. That's what a tribe is, people who are descended from a particular set of ancestors. Jews are a classic example - they're descendants of Judah, the son of Israel, formerly Jacob. It's not something you decide to "join" (although you may be adopted into one.) Political feelings are just that, emotions which stem from thoughts. Basing one's life on politics, which, unfortunately, too many people do, is nothing but folly. While religion is a belief (or lack of one) of a divine being, politics are creations of political parties who only want your vote. And yes, many Republicans ARE RINOS but then again, many "conservatives" are actually right-wing progressives. It's all about power. As for January 6, if those protestors had wanted to, they could have been armed and then there really would have been problems.
Great comment and I agree 100%. The biggest issue I see are people so enthralled with the drama of politics they have completely severed their minds from material reality and observed outcomes. I don’t get this political tribalism. Sports I get, but most people, outside Pittsburg anyway, don’t go around deciding their entire existence on a sports team.
The actual political outcomes that impact each of us arise from public policy decided by politicians. The party label attached to any particular policy means nothing. The material outcomes of those policies are what impact us, no matter how much cognitive disassociation we engage in, and we each have an obligation to our actual tribe - our families, communities, and loved ones - to vote for policies in their and our own best interest. Not based on who makes us feel better with endless faux moral outrage outcomes be damned.
There are real outrages to be concerned with and the mental gymnastics people engage in to be concerned with the ones that amount to mainstream media propoganda is destructive and alarming. I
Objective facts matter. Whatever one thinks of Trump, documents show Trump tried to call in the national guard before the event, and after things went south, but was denied by Nancy Pelosi who controlled security on capital hill. The breach of the capital began while Trump was still talking a good distance away. No member of congress was ever in actual physical danger. The election was not almost overturned and our country was not almost brought down by a dude in a Viking bikini playing with Nancy Pelosi’s podium accompanied largely by a bunch of older people staying within the walkways taking pictures while destroying nothing. There were bad actors and agitators that deserve to be punished proportional. Evidence shows at least some were likely FBI informants and contractors, which should be the real outrage. The only people who died as a result of that “protest” were Trump supporters including a 5’3” unarmed female veteran shot in the neck by a capital police officer.
I’m not condoning what happened, but it makes no more sense to genuinely believe J6 was a threat to our country as people believing a hippie camping out on a monument they aren’t actually destroying is going to erase our history. There is a reason the media and DOJ are desperate to keep all the footage of that day “classified” and it’s got nothing to do with moving a few cameras around they should be moving from time to time anyway. Being kept in the dark about what happened in the capital we all own by law enforcement agencies we fund is a genuine concern. Lack of transparency causes distrust, division, and allows faux narratives to spread - and that lack of transparency applies to everything from the JFK files the CIA is still fighting the release of through much of what the government has done and knew up until today. With all the talk about classified documents why are so few asking what business the government has shielding more than a billion documents extending back to decades before my birth from we the people and we the taxpayers who fund the entire operation?
Agree except one thing. Nancy Pelosi should have approved backup ahead of time, but Trump had enough time to reach out on that day. He was watching the break-in and the subsequent melee on national TV and could not be bothered to make a couple phone calls. I expect more from the Commander in Chief.
What a strange comment. This person clearly did not read the piece. The whole point was that people should not mindlessly agree with their 'tribe' on every point, just because that point is made by their own side.
Tribe is meant metaphorically, in the way everyone is using it ("I'm looking for my tribe" - from sensitivity to interest in obscure horror movies). You can feel a belonging to more than one group or 'tribe' at once, without having to agree on every point and without being exclusively preoccupied with the topic of that group.
I share this frustration as well. It’s like the extremists from both sides control the conversation, and nobody can accept an opposing point of view. My Substack is meant to try to get people to see both sides of the aisle by posting CNN, Fox News, CBS and NBC political news all in one place.
Here is the difference between news channels, as I see it. No matter the slant when it is talked about, you see all the stories on Fox, regardless of who it may make look bad. MSNBCNN doesn't even talk about the stories that make the left look bad, so their viewers truly do live in a different reality. While I understand your opinion, it is not a fair comparison to see them the same. Your partner understands, he watches Fox, and refuses to watch the communists he fled on the others. I know this sounds tribal, but it is reality.
I make a point of trying to hear as many different perspectives I can. Recently, I read a piece that said terrible things about people I have respect for. Pretty sure a few of them have been on Bridget's podcast, but I still read it because I believe in hearing from all sides. Though I do worry about putting it out there and allowing people to read it. There's a place that I chose not to post it because I worried that there'd be a backlash thanks to them being in favour of many of the people who were said to be terrible.
I agree that retreating to the echo chamber is a bad idea (no matter what side it’s on). I think if we actually sat down and had a conversation about the issues, we’d find we have a lot more in common than the media makes it seem. I have many friends on both sides of it (some of whom are open to it) and have had several meaningful conversations about the issues (even coming to an agreement on solutions).
My greatest concern is the disingenuous way our government on both sides of the aisle casually lie about what they intend to do and what their political opponents are doing. I think the greatest failure of our political system is the level of transparency they are willing to offer and the use of fear to motivate people to stand with them in their position. It is obvious that both sides cannot be right. And I refuse to ‘pick a side’ to stand with people who are not accustomed to either transparency or moderation. I want neither a fascist state nor a communist paradise. I don’t want a ‘tribe’ because the nature of tribalism is to be in conflict with other ‘tribes’ who disagree or hold different ideologies. This, in a day and age when everyone getting along and working for common sense goals that benefit the greatest number of people would seem like the most reasonable way to go. I would settle for voting for an honest candidate…but they are not very popular these days. So as usual, I will vote for the lesser of two evils.
Good Lord Bridget, where do you find these people! This woman apparently doesn't understand that a person's tribe is their family. That's what a tribe is, people who are descended from a particular set of ancestors. Jews are a classic example - they're descendants of Judah, the son of Israel, formerly Jacob. It's not something you decide to "join" (although you may be adopted into one.) Political feelings are just that, emotions which stem from thoughts. Basing one's life on politics, which, unfortunately, too many people do, is nothing but folly. While religion is a belief (or lack of one) of a divine being, politics are creations of political parties who only want your vote. And yes, many Republicans ARE RINOS but then again, many "conservatives" are actually right-wing progressives. It's all about power. As for January 6, if those protestors had wanted to, they could have been armed and then there really would have been problems.
Great comment and I agree 100%. The biggest issue I see are people so enthralled with the drama of politics they have completely severed their minds from material reality and observed outcomes. I don’t get this political tribalism. Sports I get, but most people, outside Pittsburg anyway, don’t go around deciding their entire existence on a sports team.
The actual political outcomes that impact each of us arise from public policy decided by politicians. The party label attached to any particular policy means nothing. The material outcomes of those policies are what impact us, no matter how much cognitive disassociation we engage in, and we each have an obligation to our actual tribe - our families, communities, and loved ones - to vote for policies in their and our own best interest. Not based on who makes us feel better with endless faux moral outrage outcomes be damned.
There are real outrages to be concerned with and the mental gymnastics people engage in to be concerned with the ones that amount to mainstream media propoganda is destructive and alarming. I
Objective facts matter. Whatever one thinks of Trump, documents show Trump tried to call in the national guard before the event, and after things went south, but was denied by Nancy Pelosi who controlled security on capital hill. The breach of the capital began while Trump was still talking a good distance away. No member of congress was ever in actual physical danger. The election was not almost overturned and our country was not almost brought down by a dude in a Viking bikini playing with Nancy Pelosi’s podium accompanied largely by a bunch of older people staying within the walkways taking pictures while destroying nothing. There were bad actors and agitators that deserve to be punished proportional. Evidence shows at least some were likely FBI informants and contractors, which should be the real outrage. The only people who died as a result of that “protest” were Trump supporters including a 5’3” unarmed female veteran shot in the neck by a capital police officer.
I’m not condoning what happened, but it makes no more sense to genuinely believe J6 was a threat to our country as people believing a hippie camping out on a monument they aren’t actually destroying is going to erase our history. There is a reason the media and DOJ are desperate to keep all the footage of that day “classified” and it’s got nothing to do with moving a few cameras around they should be moving from time to time anyway. Being kept in the dark about what happened in the capital we all own by law enforcement agencies we fund is a genuine concern. Lack of transparency causes distrust, division, and allows faux narratives to spread - and that lack of transparency applies to everything from the JFK files the CIA is still fighting the release of through much of what the government has done and knew up until today. With all the talk about classified documents why are so few asking what business the government has shielding more than a billion documents extending back to decades before my birth from we the people and we the taxpayers who fund the entire operation?
Agree except one thing. Nancy Pelosi should have approved backup ahead of time, but Trump had enough time to reach out on that day. He was watching the break-in and the subsequent melee on national TV and could not be bothered to make a couple phone calls. I expect more from the Commander in Chief.
What a strange comment. This person clearly did not read the piece. The whole point was that people should not mindlessly agree with their 'tribe' on every point, just because that point is made by their own side.
Tribe is meant metaphorically, in the way everyone is using it ("I'm looking for my tribe" - from sensitivity to interest in obscure horror movies). You can feel a belonging to more than one group or 'tribe' at once, without having to agree on every point and without being exclusively preoccupied with the topic of that group.
I share this frustration as well. It’s like the extremists from both sides control the conversation, and nobody can accept an opposing point of view. My Substack is meant to try to get people to see both sides of the aisle by posting CNN, Fox News, CBS and NBC political news all in one place.
https://open.substack.com/pub/polarnewsusa?r=1bl9lv&utm_medium=ios
Here is the difference between news channels, as I see it. No matter the slant when it is talked about, you see all the stories on Fox, regardless of who it may make look bad. MSNBCNN doesn't even talk about the stories that make the left look bad, so their viewers truly do live in a different reality. While I understand your opinion, it is not a fair comparison to see them the same. Your partner understands, he watches Fox, and refuses to watch the communists he fled on the others. I know this sounds tribal, but it is reality.
I make a point of trying to hear as many different perspectives I can. Recently, I read a piece that said terrible things about people I have respect for. Pretty sure a few of them have been on Bridget's podcast, but I still read it because I believe in hearing from all sides. Though I do worry about putting it out there and allowing people to read it. There's a place that I chose not to post it because I worried that there'd be a backlash thanks to them being in favour of many of the people who were said to be terrible.