If You Read Anything This Year …
A democracy is essentially about determining the course of our nation together. To do that, it helps a lot to have a good citizenry. A good citizenry is informed, serious about things that are worth taking seriously, and not liable to be led off course by demagogues. (Everyone doesn’t have to be like this, but you need a critical mass of people who are.) But I’ve always thought that a good citizenry is also composed of people who assume, until proven wrong, that many of the people who disagree with them are acting in good faith.
This matters for policy: you’re unlikely to choose sound policies if you assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a depraved, corrupt imbecile. It’s hard to learn anything from people you have completely written off. But it’s also corrosive to any kind of community or dialogue to assume the worst about large numbers of people you’ve never met. It makes you less willing to try to take their problems seriously, and to try to figure out how they might be solved, or to try to understand what’s driving them.
I hate it when people do this to me. I never wanted to do it to them.
Those words are from the “last post” of one of the best bloggers ever, IMHO, the cryptically named Hilzoy, who has now “retired.” It remains to be seen if Hilzoy defines retirement like Brett Favre does, but no matter how long her absence, I agree with the Dish’s Patrick Appel that her “voice will be sorely missed.”
It will be sorely missed because Hilzoy had a reliable, recurring knack for challenging the rest of us to be members of the “good citizenry,” as she defines it in the excerpt above. In fact, I think the most important words from that excerpt might be its modified-golden-rule sentences:
I hate it when people do this to me. I never wanted to do it to them.
A month ago today, I explained why I was finding it increasingly difficult to listen to the contemporary right wing of American politics. Hilzoy’s parting shot encourages me to try again to listen to them, even though many of them clearly don’t want to listen to me and my ilk.
Granted, Hilzoy acknowledges in her final post that there are some “political opponents” who have “clearly forfeited” their right to “respect.” But she also suggests we be careful to keep that list of forfeitures (forfeitees?) limited — to make it a true list of exceptions, not of entire classes or categories of people.
10 Responses to “If You Read Anything This Year …”
Thanks for the suggestion and kudos on this:
“Quite recently — a month ago, today, in fact — I explained why I was finding it increasingly difficult to listen to the contemporary right wing of American politics. Hilzoy’s parting shot encourages me to try again to listen to them, even though many of them clearly don’t want to listen to me and my ilk.”
I will try to follow your example
“A month ago today, I explained why I was finding it increasingly difficult to listen to the contemporary right wing of American politics.”
My first reaction to this sentence was this:
“Kiss my ass you self-righteous prick.”
But I knew that somehow, this would be taken in the wrong light. There are those who would interpret a phrase like that to be an unprovoked, ad hominen attack on someone who was making an effort to bring comity to a diverse group. Far from that, the reaction was a natural stance to a frame of mind that views conservative thought outside of the estrogen-filled ramblings of David Brooks and Christopher Buckley as “extreme”.
On its own, should someone’s position in the center of politics evoke such a response?
Of course not. Until, that is, the same person starts to use his “moderate” and “sensible” air of reasonableness to tout Frank Rich as less than a raving lunatic leftist who viscerally hates and wishes death on all things conservative.
No, I won’t stoop to using words like “Kiss my ass”, and I certainly won’t lower myself by calling you a “self-righteous prick”. But I will tell you that you have none of the credibility that Hilzoy had in her writings, by virtue of your unbalanced and intellectually insulting depiction of partisan writers.
When I read “Kiss my ass you self-righteous pr*ck,” my first reaction was “What a f***ing foul mouth,”
but I knew that somehow, this would be taken in the wrong light.
There are those who would interpret a phrase like that to be an unprovoked, ad hominen attack on someone who was making an effort to bring comity to a diverse group.
No, I certainly won't lower myself calling someone “a f***ing foul mouth,” but I will tell you that it is pretty tempting sometimes.
Hilzoy’s parting shot encourages me to try again to listen to them, even though many of them clearly don’t want to listen to me and my ilk.
Look I don't know exactly how to put this but there are just as many closed-minded people and wingnuts on the left as there are on the right. Don't worry about whether the extremes will listen to you, they will only listen to people who echo what they themselves say and then insult the rest. The less you worry about them the less important they become.
And jwest for pete's sake man, you have so many good things to say but why can't you be polite saying them?
DaGoat,
My comment probably was over the top, but its hard to describe how totally offensive this insufferable, pompous screed of Pete Abel's is to me.
“Oh, look how tolerant I am!” “I’ll try hard in the future to listen to the evil, racist, war mongering hicks”.
Well, thanks a lot Mr. Abel for being so open minded. As you and Frank Rich know (and is articulated nightly by such luminaries as Keith Olbermann and Ed Shultz) the world would be such a nice place if only the “extremist” on the right had the brains to agree with you.
It’s not Abel’s politics that set me off, it’s the attitude that he is being magnanimous with his time even considering another point of view.
Good lord.
Jwest describes this post as an “insufferable, pompous screed.” Wow. I had intended it as a confession about my prior failure to be fair and open minded — and a sincere pledge to do better. Not sure how that was lost in translation, but so it goes.
“estrogen-filled ramblings”. Wow. Magnanimity is exactly what is required to deal with your post, jwest.
Pete's comment has no arrogance and no anger. It's nothing more than a reminder to us all to be more objective in our thinking. To take a step back and recognize our emotional biases, which we all have. These are the goals of a good moderate, or we wouldn't be moderates.
And you reacted emotionally. You don't understand what this site is striving for. You just don't get it.
Pete -
I've read your things on TMV for a long time, as more of a lurker than anything. Your positions – like many at TMV – are left-of-center. However, they aren't presented in a mean-spirited way. Your latest post was a good one, and a reminder to all of us on this blog to listen others, and not to just talk. In the same way, as I post here at TMV with right-of-center ideas, I hope that my thoughts will be received magnanimously, and not just with ad hominem or silence.
OK, I get it (I think). Jwest was testing us.
Pete Abel's post went to the heart of what TMV is all about. Be reasonable; be considerate; listen to all sides; avoid ad hominems; don't assume that anyone holds “the truth”; stuff like that.
So jwest responds with this visceral, ad hominem laced attack on the post and TMV readers in general just to see what the reaction would be.
So, how'd we do?
All jwest-ish reactionary, narcissistic, attention seeking behavior aside (or any other kneejerk dismissals of POV's outside ones immediate, personal, pet dogmatic comfort zone) I too hope that Hilzoy has a nice break – and then comes out of “retirement”. Since she has been writing for OW I've always been able to go over there and count on getting a good dose of rational, thoughtful, and insightful commentary and analysis – something most of us know is a rarity in todays polarized, self-promoting, non-original, and not particularly deep environment. She will indeed be missed…