tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post9161358573307735290..comments2024-03-03T13:55:46.243-08:00Comments on Ambling Along the Aqueduct: XKCD character: "Political debates... show how good smart people are at rationalizing."Timmi Duchamphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-59899532496422519752007-05-20T09:59:00.000-07:002007-05-20T09:59:00.000-07:00Thank you both for your comments.Civility is such ...Thank you both for your comments.<BR/><BR/>Civility is such an interesting, complex, crazy topic. I had no real understanding of how complex it was until recently. I didn't understand how it is used as a hammer to silence people whose opinions or bodies don't match the mainstream; however they express their opinions, they are branded as uncivil. Chilling.<BR/><BR/>I agree that anti-abortion is a better label for forced birth advocates than pro-life is. I make an effort to use it, but I still slip sometimes. :(Rachel Swirskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00939668760298612130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-60230889325477875942007-05-20T05:16:00.000-07:002007-05-20T05:16:00.000-07:00I'm short on time this morning, but my mind insist...I'm short on time this morning, but my mind insists that I must join this conversation, so I'm going to throw out a few thoughts. <BR/>First, I think almost everybody in the U.S. -- except those actively involved in politics -- likes to present themselves as too good for politics. I see that in the cartoon as well. The issues are complicated; political debates are often simplistic. Only people good at rationalization will engage in politics.<BR/>But politics is just coming together as a group to work things out. It's very messy, because there are so many interests and points of view that have to be resolved. And it gets simplistic in part because very few people have the time and energy to take a thoughtful and considered position on every important issue of the day. <BR/>We don't really have the luxury of opting out -- especially here in the U.S. where the policies that get made not only affect us, but much of the rest of the world. <BR/>The discussion of the Overton window is fascinating. Right now, popular perception has labeled Hillary Clinton as a liberal -- and sometimes even farther left than that! Given that she is -- at best -- a moderate Democrat, that means the concept of the middle has moved markedly to the right. And one reason some of Bill Clinton's domestic policies were more conservative than some of Nixon's -- as Timmi points out -- was that Nixon was reacting to the substantial changes brought about by Lyndon Johnson, whereas Clinton was reacting to the Reagan years. (Ah, what a president Lyndon would have made if it hadn't been for that damn war!)<BR/>If Hillary is the left wing, then G.W. Bush as he was presented to us in 2000 did look like the moderate. <BR/>On the abortion discussion in particular: Have you all noticed that almost everyone refers to the anti-abortion groups as "pro-life" -- including people who support abortion rights. I've even heard the term from speakers for Planned Parenthood and NARAL, I think. Those words alone make their position sound reasonable, and by using them, we cede them the center. We should insist that the term "anti-abortion" -- and, in some cases, anti-birth control, be used to describe them. To do that, we may need to define ourselves as pro-abortion -- and that could reasonably move the center back to pro-choice, which is probably the opinion held by the majority of people in this country.Nancy Jane Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01030267999537291250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-71691307828814281392007-05-19T15:49:00.000-07:002007-05-19T15:49:00.000-07:00Over the last couple of decades, the US Left’s nee...Over the last couple of decades, the US Left’s need for the “Overton Window” has become pressing. It’s instructive to compare some of Richard Nixon’s policies, say, with those of Bill Clinton, since Nixon’s positions on many issues can often be found to have been to Clinton’s left. <BR/><BR/>While in professional politics I often think that positioning oneself as a “moderate” is simply a sign of timidity, in political behavior generally (as seen in any organizational meeting, for instance), the “middle” position has also come to be seen as the embodiment of civility, so that those who speak too far off the middle of the positions discussed (no matter how far right and therefore extreme the middle might actually be) are perceived as intolerant and uncivil. In my view, this is a social psychological formation that is plaguing the Left, since leftists these days are almost never fanatical zealots. And I’m certain that it’s done a lot of harm to feminist practice, too. <BR/><BR/>The news media, of course, are at least partly responsible. They invented the notion of presenting “two sides” to every issue—and then deliberately excluded positions on the left from consideration by claiming that the “two sides” were the most extreme right-wing position they could find on the one hand and a center-right position on the other. Non-representation of the Left inevitably resulted, all the while the media trumpeted its “fairness” and “objectivity” in presenting “both sides” of whatever issue was under discussion.Timmi Duchamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.com