Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Stop the Demonizing!

By Rick Blumenberg @rickblumenberg
We have two major political parties in the United States. Most of us want it that way because we believe in the two party system. This means we have two different views on how things should be done and that’s often where the difficulties lie. We tend to think because someone doesn’t agree with our way thinking and our way of doing things they must be demonic evil people.
We need to change that disastrous way of thinking.
Before we know it, another U.S. presidential election will be underway; or, perhaps we could say it already is. As it heats up, if it continues as it has for as long as I can remember, Democrats will demonize Republicans and Republicans will demonize Democrats. But does what “is” have to always be? Is there any possibility of change for the better?
Demonizing is not a new concept.
If you go back to the early days of our nation you will find unbelievable things being said by one candidate against another. But just because this sort of candidating has gone on as long as we’ve been a nation, it doesn’t necessarily need to continue with the same hate-filled rhetoric. We can do better. I consider myself to be a confirmed independent voter. I do lean toward republican views, mostly because I am a confirmed pro-lifer and the Republicans are, in my opinion, the pro-life party.
Total Agreement is Unrealistic
But I have Democrat friends who would strongly disagree with the last phrase in my previous statement. They consider themselves to be just as “pro-life” as the Republicans, but they are “pro-choice” in their thinking as to how best to favor life. Many Democrats do not agree with abortion, but feel there are many other social evils that deserve attention and think Republicans are a one-issue party made up of people who don’t care about poverty, racism and other of society’s major ills.
I could be wrong, but I think the majority of people in both parties want what is best for our nation. They also believe their way of reaching the “best” for the nation is most effective. If we can’t agree with each other on the best method could we at least give one-another the benefit of the doubt as to motive? Just because we disagree with someone doesn’t mean that person is all bad. If we would cool the rhetoric, perhaps we could be friends even though we disagree strongly. I don’t suggest we agree on everything. Let’s just agree to not be so disagreeable.
Could I be wrong?
Another suggestion, would it be possible for each party to consider the possibility they could be wrong? And their opponent could be right? It is so much easier to see another’s point of view if we are open to the possibility we could be wrong and they could be right. It is a humbling experience, but it could also be much less embarrassing if we ever came to a realization they really were right.
I have one final suggestion for the up-coming presidential campaign. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if every candidate only talked about his or her own views, without misrepresenting or demeaning his or her opponent? If one candidate feels his or her record has been misrepresented, what if it was assumed the opponent was honestly mistaken? Refute the charges with respect, but give no suggestion of lying and let no demonizing be attributed.
What’s that? You say, “Dream on Rick! It will never happen.”
You may be right. I may be wrong. But I can dream can’t I?
I’m Rick Blumenberg and that’s
My View from Tanner Creek”.

  

No comments: