Well, it seems to me that people are pretty much set in what they think and
in what they believe. They get their information from the sources in which they
have faith. Even if one presents evidence that the source is biased in what It
reports, people won't believe the evidence if they've always trusted the
source. Additionally, most people aren't interested in the true workings of
government, nor do they understand how politics directly influences their
lives. Aside from whatever religion they may or may not have, they believe in
American exceptionalism and they support the national state, regardless of how
what the national state does, affects the world. In any discussion, one person
or another will say something like, "The US may have its faults, but it's the
best country in the world and I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. In spite
of what European settlers did to native Americans, Native Americans have always
supported our Military and have joined in large numbers. The other day, there
was a discussion about capitalism on the Jaws list which I inadvertently
started. At one point, one of the members said something to the effect that
capitalism is an excellent system and if I didn't like it, I should go back to
Russia. I'd immediately withdrawn from the insane capitalism discussion when it
began, explaining that I'd made one point about the continuing charges for Jaws
upgrades, but I did have to get back into the discussion, just to explain that
Communism in Russia ended with the fall of the Soviet Union and that Russia now
has hyper-capitalism. That particular list member, like so many Americans, has
been taught a frame of reference, that of the elites of the American empire,
through which he sees everything. That also was evident on the Victor Stream
Users' list when I was trying to get the Sputnik Radio station on the stream
and one of the list members said that you can't hear anything but Russian
propaganda on that station. She's never listened to a program on that station.
As for this list, no one has given up their religious beliefs because of some
very strong anti-religious opinion expressed here. And no one has become a
Marxist, in spite of Roger's attempt to indoctrinate us. Whether or not some
people have gained information or been entertained by the articles we post,
we'll never know. Aside from Bob's occasional comments, no one else responds on
list.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 12:09 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: my humble analysis of the blind democracy list
The following is a personal opinion, and not to be confused with actual facts:
With that being said, it is my opinion that what we are encountering is a
normal process. A new fad comes along...like Email. Suddenly we can all
chatter from nearly anywhere in the world. Free! Well, after the cost of the
Internet. And so we gather in little special interest groups. Eventually the
newness wears off and we turn to other interesting distractions.
My kids and their kids are mostly on Facebook. Something about "liking"
strangers is annoying to me, so I keep swearing I'll never hook up with
Facebook.
I've learned a great deal from my involvement with several Lists. But I've
also come up against interesting behaviors that I have no answer for.
A major question for me is why we can't accept the opinions of others as just
that, opinions. Opinions offer us the luxury of exploring subjects without
committing ourselves. We can explore, challenge, disagree, and alter our own
opinions on countless subjects.
But what I find, is a strong resistance to interaction. rather than debating
an opinion, folks want to defend their own belief by trashing the opinions of
others. We end up with what looks like a bunch of Fox News Channels, each one
shouting out their beliefs while closing their eyes and ears to all around them.
I wonder if this is learned behavior, or is it part of our Human makeup?
For my way of thinking, the great value I derive from Blind Democracy is the
open forum on which I can explore what I have thought, and how the new
information fits in, or alters what I believed. If that makes any sense. The
offering of out of the way articles stimulates my thinking. I don't have to
accept it as factual, or trash it as lies.
It is simply fodder for mind expansion.
Don't others on this list...assuming that there really are, "others", feel the
thrill of exploring new ideas, and plugging them into our existing beliefs?
Over and over we see examples of emerging dictators shutting down the exchange
of thought, as the nations become less and less free.
And yet, this is exactly what I see on several lists. Either I am asked to
shut my Marxist or Socialist mouth, or people announce they are leaving the
list because they don't enjoy the arguing. In other words, they don't like my
opinions, but can't offer theirs. Instead of a discussion that leads to mind
expansion, we see folks slam the door against anything they feel might
challenge their own beliefs.
Finally, for this rant, disagreement is not to be confused with turning people
or groups against one another. Disagreement, given with respect, is the door
to a stronger world.
Carl Jarvis, wanting to be an Opinion er, not a Preacher!
On 10/11/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not sure how many people actually read this sadly depleted list. A
few of us keep on posting, most likely to fill our own needs for self
expression. Once in a great while, Bob Hachey, Penny, or Frank posts a
message. Richard comments briefly, upon occasion. But we have two
people who basically dominate the list. Roger is our
instructor-in-chief. He consistently instructs us in logic, and keeps
our thoughts and language usage within, what he believes to be,
appropriate boundaries. Carl is our loving and gentle preacher. It is
not traditional religion that he preaches, but a gentle version of
what Roger is attempting to teach. Roger enjoys debate. Carl never
argues and is always kind and thoughtful. It's kind of like, "good
cop, bad cop". Roger and I post articles. Carl is supportive by always
commenting on our articles, although I'm not sure that he gets time to
read many of them. It's a kindness because of he didn't comment,
neither of us would know if anyone bothered to read what we post. Most
people aren't interested or they just get turned off by the occasional
arguments. Few people are left from the original list and our recent
visitors appear to have left. Evan left because, as he told me, he
just doesn't like to spend time arguing. I come across some articles
that seem really interesting and that are very different from what is
available from mainstream websites, and I can't resist posting them in
case there's some lurker who would benefit from reading the article
and who wouldn't know that it existed, if I didn't post it. But I do
wonder, sometimes Unlike our two white male leaders, who pretend that
they're not leading, I don't particularly enjoy teaching or preaching.
I'm also a rebellious soul so I have issues with having my wayward
thoughts and emotions, corrected. But I suspect that most people feel
that way. Most people like to express their thoughts and feelings and
they can usually tolerate a gentle disagreement. Carl and I, for
example, will never agree about how to define class. But it doesn't
matter. We just occasionally disagree. I've learned from listening to
podcasts on which I hear younger people talk, and also from articles,
that the battles and insults on twitter are a whole lot worse than
most of the really angry interchanges we've had on this list. I guess
that's one of the down sides of technology.
Miriam
