This Side of Public Discourse
I
If you ever call Obama a socialist, your beliefs are necessarily fringe. You are not a moderate. This is not because of the title of the accusation. Obama may or may not lead to a more socialist-like governance than you want. The problem is with the ad hominem—the name calling. If you are a true moderate, you would judge each issue on it’s own merits, and try to find the best solution, and you would find that you fall somewhere in between the extremes. However, if you judge each issue on it’s own merits, and you find yourself most often falling with one side or another (conservative or liberal) than you must label yourself according to the side of the spectrum which you lean—if you want to be honest with yourself and others.
II
If you don’t judge each issue, and instead associate yourself with a party, you are nothing. You are a sheep, and for these purposes, I choose to find no differentiation between the people that blindly follow.
III
When it concerns politics, I find that people are afraid to be honest with themselves. If they say they are moderate, it rarely holds up to scrutiny. If they say they are conservative or liberal, people don’t want to expose that because they will often be questioned by others that differ in their beliefs and not be able to support their opinion with rigor, facts and proper rhetoric. They are not afraid to tell themselves—when alone—that they believe their position to be true, but they are afraid to broadcast it.
IV
I believe that the world would be a better place if people could be judged morethroughly in the public sphere. There is an inherent value to judgement when made rationally and wisely.
V
Why is this so hard? Because of the nature of public broadcasting (even with the internet pervading our lives and media) there is still much obfuscation and confusion about stances. Referencing a persons use of Facebook, a friend can oft be defined by the their publishing patterns and statements. Not only can we judge what they say themselves, but we can also see and reflect on what they choose to curate and share with others.
However, it is hard to sort through this data, and that makes it hard to synthesize and compare it. The nature of broadcasting (FB, Twitter, blogging, etc) is of a conversational nature. This is also true for politicians (the other side of the political equation), but these people have a group of people that constantly record and compare statements across time. The citizen is rarely important enough to have this done for them, and they refuse to do it themselves. This creates a vacuum in public discourse.
VI
I want to solve this problem. Details later.
