Beware of Contempt (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

My take away was I think there's room for nuance. It's not completely black and white. 

I'd love to see more civic virtue, kindness, and grace. And less contempt and judgment.

But to be honest, I'm feeling kind of dumb for even posting the article. I should have known better. 

I think it's a good article that expresses an important sentiment. I just think there has to be a line, some point at which contempt becomes acceptable and even preferable. I hate to violate Godwin's Law here, but surely everyone agrees that it would have been really good if there had been more widespread and forceful contempt for Hitler in the 1930s, yes?  Nobody should feel the obligation to hear out and respect someone who suggests all our problems are the fault of the Jews and the answer is violent repression of dissent. So where's the line?  Do I have an obligation to hear out and respect Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham and Lou Dobbs when they suggest all our problems are the fault of immigrants? I don't know the answer, but it's a fair to ask the question of the article.

Or maybe your "I should have known better" was a reference to the recent posts in this thread?

 

[glvsav37]

I don't think it's incredible as I think it's a human issue.

Granted, lots of it does easily veer to politics. But as I was seeing it, this is way bigger than politics. As someone noted with marriages, whenever relationships or interactions get into the area where one side has contempt for the other, it's poisoned. My preference is to avoid that. 

dont you think that it is a social (or lack thereof) issue today?

Back in the day, you had pockets of people who lived, worked and conversed with each other. You may not agree with that person, but you lived with them, saw them at social gatherings and kids sports and moved on with your life. Your circle was narrow but diverse. If Johnny was an ### politically, he would just end up in his garage, drinking beer with 2 other friends and complain about the state of yada yada and life moved on. 

Now, we converse with devices and forums and digitally put ourselves in silos of what we want to hear. Only to poke our heads out to throw stones at the other silos just long enough to escape back into ours w/o fear of being caught, injured or identified. Its easy to inject ourselves into other peoples issues, just because we can, even if it doesn't fix or move the issue closer to resolution...just to make our opinion heard, even though it was never asked for in the 1st place. We can lob 'opinion grenades' out into the world freely because life is moving so fast it is only temporary and you'll never see those people you hurt anyway. Not to mention, we have  window into issues and situations happening well outside our immediate circle that ultimately just help fan our flames and allow us to rage on even though we only know what is being served to us by some 'media outlet' 

We've become a generation of keyboard warriors b/c we don't have to stand face to face with someone and disagree with them. Its a lot harder to make a complete case when you are actively being debated and responsible for your thoughts vs hiding behind a screen name and shrinking out of the conversation when you realize you've reached a dead end in your argument. 

 

[Statorama]

We've become a generation of keyboard warriors b/c we don't have to stand face to face with someone and disagree with them. Its a lot harder to make a complete case when you are actively being debated and responsible for your thoughts vs hiding behind a screen name 

Great post overall @glvsav37 but this part stood out for me.  I think that in large part, we've become numb to the fact that the words on the screen come from actual people.  It's almost like others are simply NPC's in one giant video game that we have to "win".

It's bleeding out beyond the keyboard though.  More and more I see people not even really listening to each other, but simply waiting for an opening so that they can say what they want to say.

 

[Bonzai]

FWIW I also posted this critique of the article, which I agreed with. Here it is, scrubbed for political content:

-I admire this article and the civic attitude it represents. But I feel like it avoids something important: what does one do when some of your fellow citizens do not just disagree with you, but believe in - and advocate - things that are genuinely contemptible?

-It's one thing not to make normal political disagreements into grounds for contempt. In that case, sign me up for Brooks's call for kindness. I will admit I am first among sinners on that. But at some point, contemptible ideas must be treated with open contempt and shame.

-I mean, when someone [insert genuinely cruel, violent and/or bigoted behavior or ideology here] - I think contempt is a normal reaction that kicks in as part of a healthy allergy to such talk.

-So, sign me up for more civic virtue, kindness, and grace. But I never signed up for living in a morally relativistic, no-contempt, no-judgment society. Who would? Maybe I didn't understand the piece, which is always possible, but I think Brooks elided this problem.

This just seems like a bad slippery slope argument.  No one said that contempt didn't have a time or place.

 

[TobiasFunke]

This just seems like a bad slippery slope argument.  No one said that contempt didn't have a time or place.

From the article:

"Next, each of us can make a commitment never to treat others with contempt, even if we believe they deserve it."

 

[Bonzai]

Where are we on white supremacists? Worthy of contempt still?

Sure, but what about climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers, people against gun control, people that wear MAGA hats, people that fake hate crimes, Robert Kraft, blah blah blah.  It's not sustainable.  If you're on social media (especially Twitter) or watch cable news on a regular basis, you're being fed contempt-inducing garbage constantly. We're not constructed to be this outraged all the time.  It's corrosive.

When I experience that feeling anymore, I'm suspicious of it (look at me!).  I think it's helpful to view outrage, contempt, or righteous indignation as a precious resource.  It definitely has its place in society, but it needs to be managed and conserved.

 

[Bonzai]

From the article:

"Next, each of us can make a commitment never to treat others with contempt, even if we believe they deserve it."

I see. I think that goes too far.  I honestly doubt that if you sat down with the guy he would really say that contempt was never appropriate.  I think his line is that we need to try to do better.  I at least agree with that.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Or maybe your "I should have known better" was a reference to the recent posts in this thread?




 

I should have known better how strong the desire is for some to hold others in contempt. It's largely who we are as society today. It's why the ratings at FOX and MSNBC are booming. 

I should have realized it wouldn't be seen as nuanced and instead would turn into whataboutism and spiral downward. 

It's fine. I have fits of optimism every so often like this. All good. 

 

[glvsav37]

Great post overall @glvsav37 but this part stood out for me.  I think that in large part, we've become numb to the fact that the words on the screen come from actual people.  It's almost like others are simply NPC's in one giant video game that we have to "win".

It's bleeding out beyond the keyboard though.  More and more I see people not even really listening to each other, but simply waiting for an opening so that they can say what they want to say.




 

I think people are becoming more brazen about their altercations b/c it has become an acceptable method of debating to overpower, shut down and flat out scream at someone until you feel you've made your point. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

You will not see more than 3 or 4 entries from me in any TPF thread because, as i often state, i simply will not argue to establish a difference, only in search of new agreement. In ten years of regular political entries and making the very observation that the linked article does in FFA, i've yet to be positively engaged.

I put it to you that is because 95% of the participants in TPF are there to only to argue. The tactics of truthiness allow the troll to get their nyaahnyaahs in on almost any subject and continually soil political debate.

The linked article is a part of it. AEI is the think tank of choice of the man who almost singlehandedly legitimized reactionary politics, Newt Gingrich. This "common sense" mission of Chris Demuth and his successor @ AEI, the author of this article, is the equivalent of Newt going around poking folks in the eye and then sending optometrists in to ask what you did to yourself. By tricking opponents into qualifying themselves as equal partners in discord, reactionaries win a fight they instigated.

I would love an honest conversation on forensic manners, but not one begun with propaganda.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Am i allowed to have contempt for the guy that throws his cigarette butt on the ground 4 feet from the ashcan? 

 

[Joe Bryant]

You will not see more than 3 or 4 entries from me in any TPF thread because, as i often state, i simply will not argue to establish a difference, only in search of new agreement. In ten years of regular political entries and making the very observation that the linked article does in FFA, i've yet to be positively engaged.

I put it to you that is because 95% of the participants in TPF are there to only to argue. The tactics of truthiness allow the troll to get their nyaahnyaahs in on almost any subject and continually soil political debate.

The linked article is a part of it. AEI is the think tank of choice of the man who almost singlehandedly legitimized reactionary politics, Newt Gingrich. This "common sense" mission of Chris Demuth and his successor @ AEI, the author of this article, is the equivalent of Newt going around poking folks in the eye and then sending optometrists in to ask what you did to yourself. By tricking opponents into qualifying themselves as equal partners in discord, reactionaries win a fight they instigated.

I would love an honest conversation on forensic manners, but not one begun with propaganda.

Understood. I have no idea of much about the author so that didn't bother me. 

Let's say it's me saying this: "I'd love to see more civic virtue, kindness, and grace. And less contempt and judgment. Because it feels to me like contempt is poison. And it's powerful as it's addictive. As the article says, it's not that we need to disagree less. We need to disagree better."

What do you think?

 

[TobiasFunke]

I should have known better how strong the desire is for some to hold others in contempt. It's largely who we are as society today. It's why the ratings at FOX and MSNBC are booming. 

I should have realized it wouldn't be seen as nuanced and instead would turn into whataboutism and spiral downward. 

It's fine. I have fits of optimism every so often like this. All good. 

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

One week as an experiment I deleted Twitter and installed Tik Tok on my phone in its place, and came away feeling much better about humanity.  Eventually I navigated back to Twitter because I'm old and lame and snarky and I crave real time info about sports and politics, but it was nice to get a brief glimpse of happy people using the internet to fun with each other.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

One week as an experiment I deleted Twitter and installed Tik Tok on my phone in its place, and came away feeling much better about humanity.  Eventually I navigated back to Twitter because I'm old and lame and snarky and I crave real time info about sports and politics, but it was nice to get a brief glimpse of happy people using the internet to fun with each other.

What is Tik Tok?

--- Another old guy

 

[wikkidpissah]

Understood. I have no idea of much about the author so that didn't bother me. 

Let's say it's me saying this: "I'd love to see more civic virtue, kindness, and grace. And less contempt and judgment. Because it feels to me like contempt is poison. And it's powerful as it's addictive. As the article says, it's not that we need to disagree less. We need to disagree better."

What do you think?

I am very much a polemicist. Things are very wrong in this land which is supposed to be the leader of the very best (i'd say "right" but someone wrong would take credit) and i want to see that change. But i can make my point quickly and won't argue very far beyond any point which seeks no common ground.

It is for us to take a stand, not a side, and taking a side above one's nation is treason.

As i've posted many times before around here, we Vermonters have a saying "The more attention one pays to the business of others, the less one pays to their own" Contempt is a tool, or more appropriately, a toy of the former. Anyone who uses it paints himself as a juvenile. Unfortunately, immaturity is not only celebrated but marketed these days.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

One week as an experiment I deleted Twitter and installed Tik Tok on my phone in its place, and came away feeling much better about humanity.  Eventually I navigated back to Twitter because I'm old and lame and snarky and I crave real time info about sports and politics, but it was nice to get a brief glimpse of happy people using the internet to fun with each other.

I hope so. I'm just not sure. It's a super small sample size obviously with just what I see, but I don't see a great deal of kids doing pretty well. I see more general jealousy and anxiety. But I hope what you're seeing is the more accurate picture.

Can you elaborate on what you're seeing and more on Tik Tok? 

 

[parasaurolophus]

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

One week as an experiment I deleted Twitter and installed Tik Tok on my phone in its place, and came away feeling much better about humanity.  Eventually I navigated back to Twitter because I'm old and lame and snarky and I crave real time info about sports and politics, but it was nice to get a brief glimpse of happy people using the internet to fun with each other.

The media tells us otherwise. Bullying, bullying, suicide, etc. 

 

[TobiasFunke]

I hope so. I'm just not sure. It's a super small sample size obviously with just what I see, but I don't see a great deal of kids doing pretty well. I see more general jealousy and anxiety. But I hope what you're seeing is the more accurate picture.

Can you elaborate on what you're seeing and more on Tik Tok? 

It's just a dumb app where people make silly 15 second videos of themselves mostly dancing and being silly. There's also lots of "duets" where people make side by side videos of them dancing with other users they don't know, some teary-eyed videos of military being reunited with their families, kids and pets being cute, harmless pranks (eg teenagers start to dance with their parents to "My Neck, My Back" and then capture their parents' reaction when the X-rated lyrics kick in), etc. You know, what the internet probably should be.

 

[glvsav37]

Tik Toc???  that's an app for tweens to make silly music videos of themselves, my 13 year old uses it makes music videos at home depot when shes bored.

The only thing there is a bunch of kids who are more comfortable in front of their camera then us old geezers, only because they grew up with a camera in their hand since they were born. I highly doubt thats the right platform to see the barometer of serious social issues lands. 

I will give you the idea that teens tend to be much less judgment and tolerant of racial and sexual issues, and I'm happy about that. As they say, we step further away from racist beliefs with every generation. But make no mistake about it, tweens have the potential to be just as cruel and be bullies as we did, if not worse. Tik Toc just shows kids having fun. 

 

[TobiasFunke]

The media tells us otherwise. Bullying, bullying, suicide, etc. 

Yeah, the media striking fear into the hearts of parents about the horrors their children are facing has been going on forever. How long have they been running that silly "dangerous Halloween candy" bit? 

Obviously there's always lots of room for improvement, but when I look I see is a generation that is much more tolerant and respectful and engaged than we ever were.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Tik Toc???  that's an app for tweens to make silly music videos of themselves, my 13 year old uses it makes music videos at home depot when shes bored.

The only thing there is a bunch of kids who are more comfortable in front of their camera then us old geezers, only because they grew up with a camera in their hand since they were born. I highly doubt thats the right platform to see the barometer of serious social issues lands. 

I will give you the idea that teens tend to be much less judgment and tolerant of racial and sexual issues, and I'm happy about that. As they say, we step further away from racist beliefs with every generation. But make no mistake about it, tweens have the potential to be just as cruel and be bullies as we did, if not worse. Tik Toc just shows kids having fun.  

And for the most part not being cruel and judgmental, which was my point.

Also there seem to be tons of nurses and military guys and firefighters using it. I assume it's because they spent lots of time with each other and have to find a way to amuse themselves.  But that's neither here nor there.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Yep. The goalposts on this keep moving. 

They should. That's how progress happens. 

 

[parasaurolophus]

They should. That's how progress happens. 

No it isnt. Progress towards not being racist doesnt happen because we change the definition of racism or what is considered racist. 

 

[Da Guru]

I think it's a good article that expresses an important sentiment. I just think there has to be a line, some point at which contempt becomes acceptable and even preferable. I hate to violate Godwin's Law here, but surely everyone agrees that it would have been really good if there had been more widespread and forceful contempt for Hitler in the 1930s, yes?  Nobody should feel the obligation to hear out and respect someone who suggests all our problems are the fault of the Jews and the answer is violent repression of dissent. So where's the line?  Do I have an obligation to hear out and respect Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham and Lou Dobbs when they suggest all our problems are the fault of immigrants? I don't know the answer, but it's a fair to ask the question of the article.

Or maybe your "I should have known better" was a reference to the recent posts in this thread?

I only watch them by accident..but when I have heard them they are talking about "Illegals" not legal immigrants.   I do agree they have beef with people in the country illegally  though.

 

[cosjobs]

You can choose your friends.

You can pick your friends or pick your nose, but you can't pick your friend's nose.

 

[Mister CIA]

Dan Carlin is one of my most favorite, level headed person when it comes to the political division and hypocrisy in today's culture. Its a shame he stopped recording his "Common sense" show, but he was just on the "History on Fire" podcast and it is worth a listen. 

That's the key word, I think. How do you not hold individuals and especially groups in contempt when the hypocrisy levels blow past the absurd level?  I'm looking at you, unrecognizable GOP.

 

[Slapdash]

Can we agree to have contempt for racists now?

Apparently not.   

 

[Joe Bryant]

Apparently not.   

 

 

[NewlyRetired]

 It's almost like others are simply NPC's in one giant video game that we have to "win".

This may or may not be related to the general topic but your "video game" phrase caught my eye.

Any gamer can tell you, there is no more toxic environment than playing online games with other people.   It makes the way we treat each other on the FFA look like candy and roses.

 

[DallasDMac]

It's kind of funny that a post related to the toxicity of discussion couldn't make it to page two before becoming exactly that.

"It makes the way we treat each other on the FFA look like candy and roses."

True, but the reasons for it here are exactly the same. People hiding behind a keyboard. Anonymity. Makes the true inner self manifest itself, and it isn't pretty.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I only watch them by accident..but when I have heard them they are talking about "Illegals" not legal immigrants.   I do agree they have beef with people in the country illegally  though.

Nope:
 

TUCKER  CARLSON- HOST: Good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT.  Here's a funny thing that we noticed the other day. People debate all  the time about mass immigration. What you never hear anybody do is make  the economic case for mass immigration. And here's why.

Our  country’s economy is becoming more automated and tech-centered by the  day, it’s obvious that we need more scientists and skilled engineers.  But that’s not what we’re getting. Instead, we’re getting waves of  people with high school educations or less. Nice people, no one doubts  that. But as an economic matter, this is insane.

It’s  indefensible so nobody even tries to defend it. Instead, our leaders  demand that you shut up and accept this. We have a moral obligation to  admit the world’s poor, they tell us, even if it makes our own country  poor and dirtier and more divided.

No reference to "illlegal" in there.

“In some parts of the country it does seem like the America we know and love doesn’t exist anymore,” Ingraham continued. “Massive demographic changes have been foisted upon the American people. And they’re changes that none of us ever voted for and most of us don’t like.

“Now much of this is related to both illegal and, in some cases, legal immigration that of course progressives love,” she added.

Explicitly includes legal immigration.

There's more of this. Happy to continue the discussion in the "Fox News" thread in the political forum if you like, I don't think this is the place for it.

 

[Da Guru]

Nope:
 

No reference to "illlegal" in there.

Explicitly includes legal immigration.

There's more of this. Happy to continue the discussion in the "Fox News" thread in the political forum if you like, I don't think this is the place for it.

No need..I only see cable news if it is on in an office I am calling on.

 

[TobiasFunke]

No need..I only see cable news if it is on in an office I am calling on.

You are a wise man. 

 

[jhib]

Hey Guys,

Saw this today and thought it was spot on. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/02/opinion/sunday/political-polarization.html . Thanks to @TobiasFunkefor sharing. 

I don't want to sound too much like the old man, but I think it's pretty clear the tone for how things are discussed has changed over the last few years.

This article hits on what feels to me like the big difference. Contempt. 

It used to be we'd disagree on something and that was that. Disagreement didn't make the other person a "bad person". They just had a different way of looking at something.

Now it seems like we have contempt for the other person if they don't think like we do. Like we think the other person is worthless at best. Or at worst, evil. We seem to have gone from disagreeing with to contempt for the other person. And that's a bad spot to be in. 

The good news is you're in charge of how you feel about people who disagree with you. If you find yourself feeling contempt or hatred for "the other side", check yourself. I believe by and large most people have a pretty good reason for feeling like they do.

I met a woman last year and it was pretty clear she had negative feelings about church. I asked her a bit more why she felt that way. She said, "When I was twelve my parents got divorced and they kicked us out of church. At the time of my life when I needed the most support, I got kicked to the curb.". Now I'm sure there is more to the story. But it doesn't matter because that's how she saw it as a twelve year old. Accept that's the reality of her experience and work from there. You'll get nowhere telling her she's just wrong. It's not wrong to her. 

In the same way, lots of people feel what they feel for legit reasons. Have empathy and try to understand where they're coming from. 

Now it also doesn't mean you have to throw away all your convictions and stand for nothing. This doesn't mean you drop everything and go to a "it's all groovy". It means you can disagree with people and not have contempt for them. Remember, you get to decide how you feel there.

Be the change you want to see. 

Joe, here's a related blog post that I like a lot and recommend reading.  It stresses the importance of the principle of charity, and I actually find myself looking it up and reading it again every once in a while for the reminder. 

In fact, just the other day, I caught myself falling into the trap of the fundamental attribution error that he talks about:

This is the tendency to ascribe behavior to external factors when considering our own behavior, but internal factors when considering the behavior of others. 

It might be a somewhat silly example, but fits in pretty clearly IMO.  I had to meet someone at the mall in the evening, and was about to park in what looked like an empty spot only to find that a driver had parked their car horribly over the intersection where four different spots met, effectively taking up all four spots at once.  I found another spot, cursing that driver in my mind while doing so.  When I walked past the offending car, I even snapped a quick photo and texted to my wife with a   comment. 

When she responded, I took another look at the photo and noticed there was some snow under the car.  Then it dawned on me that when I drove my son in to school that morning, the roads were clear at first, but then a snow squall came in and dropped a quick inch+ of snow.  The rest of the day was cold but also sunny, so the roads cleared up again.  The driver probably works at the mall and got there during or right after the squall so couldn't see the parking lines.  Then the snow cleared up (except for some in the shade under that car) and the drivers that arrived later in the day had no problem parking correctly in spots around that one.  So while I was assuming internal flaws in the driver - complete selfishness or at least really bad driving skills - there was a perfectly understandable external explanation.

I really have to do better with assuming the best first and not having the default be that the other person is an ###.

 

[jhib]

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

This is my experience as well.  Whenever my wife and I complain about something someone else did, my son is quick to jump in with a possible reason why it might have been an understandable action.  Stupid kid takes all the fun out of being judgmental.

 

[parasaurolophus]

This is my experience as well.  Whenever my wife and I complain about something someone else did, my son is quick to jump in with a possible reason why it might have been an understandable action.  Stupid kid takes all the fun out of being judgmental.

This has more to do with being a kid than it does being in a different generation. As a kid when somebody goes into the express line with 30 items and pays with a check you might say she must have forgotten her credit cards and she had an incident with a chemical spill at work so seeing white writing on a green background is hard. After you see it 634 times you realize odds are probably not in favor of that anymore.   

 

[wikkidpissah]

Minding other people's business is far more toxic than being judgmental

As to racism etc., not embracing every frikkin' thing a person of color or a different does is not bigotry. It is the right of every individual in the public realm,  no matter how imperial her tribe. I fought hard backinaday for racial equality and do not mind the sexual business of others, but shove some effiminacy or gangsta talk or Murcaspeak in my face and you will be judged by me as someone inferior to those who can be who they are without throwing it at others, girlfriend. And you'll pry that ol' fashioned meaning of "discrimination" from my cold, dead sarcasm.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe, here's a related blog post that I like a lot and recommend reading.  It stresses the importance of the principle of charity, and I actually find myself looking it up and reading it again every once in a while for the reminder. 

In fact, just the other day, I caught myself falling into the trap of the fundamental attribution error that he talks about:

It might be a somewhat silly example, but fits in pretty clearly IMO.  I had to meet someone at the mall in the evening, and was about to park in what looked like an empty spot only to find that a driver had parked their car horribly over the intersection where four different spots met, effectively taking up all four spots at once.  I found another spot, cursing that driver in my mind while doing so.  When I walked past the offending car, I even snapped a quick photo and texted to my wife with a   comment. 

When she responded, I took another look at the photo and noticed there was some snow under the car.  Then it dawned on me that when I drove my son in to school that morning, the roads were clear at first, but then a snow squall came in and dropped a quick inch+ of snow.  The rest of the day was cold but also sunny, so the roads cleared up again.  The driver probably works at the mall and got there during or right after the squall so couldn't see the parking lines.  Then the snow cleared up (except for some in the shade under that car) and the drivers that arrived later in the day had no problem parking correctly in spots around that one.  So while I was assuming internal flaws in the driver - complete selfishness or at least really bad driving skills - there was a perfectly understandable external explanation.

I really have to do better with assuming the best first and not having the default be that the other person is an ###.

Thanks. I do stuff like this all the time. I find myself jumping to a quick (wrong) conclusion. If I'm fortunate, I catch myself and remind myself there's likely more to the story. 

 

[Leroy Hoard]

It's kind of funny that a post related to the toxicity of discussion couldn't make it to page two before becoming exactly that.

 

[furleybaby]

Earlier post pointing out that maybe people who separate legal asylum-seekers from their children, proceed to lose said children, and also subject said children to horrific abuse along the way, or the people that support said practices, perhaps don't have their hearts in the right place = deleted. Cool.

Maybe that's contempt, when you disagree with the OP and said post just gets snipered.

And, I think just contempt by itself doesn't do anyone any good. Sophie Scholl surely felt a lot of contempt, but she also took action.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I think maybe we feel like this in part because we (and our peers) are old and we use the internet wrong. The kids seem like they're doing pretty well. They're optimistic and more tolerant and progressive and seemingly less cruel and judgmental than we were as teenagers.

I think as a whole teens are more tolerant than any generation before them.

But that tolerance has not gone hand in hand with being less cruel, imo.   I don't see any evidence that bullying, for one example, is down compared to older generations.   Technology has actually increased the amount of females who get involved in cruel behavior compared to previously.

And I stated earlier, lets not even begin to talk about how the average teen boy acts when playing video games online.

 

[glvsav37]

I think kids are generally much more tolerant then us old geezers, but can you make the case that they are generally nieve to the world and issues and that extended life experiences can have a hand in shaping a person’s biases and tolerance.  

I mean if if you ask a kid today about say income equality, wage gaps and social handout programs, they may have an certain opinion on them because they are looking at the surface.

flash forward 20 years and the same kid is struggling to make ends meet, but busting his ### at work while others are skating by and making more money and lets see if he’s as tolerant and welcoming.  

Just sayign thet they I think things that happen in your life over time really shape your perception and opinion.  

 

[tonydead]

If people can turn their backs on a loved one due to one election, what hope do we have on a message board full of strangers?

A good place to start would be if people stopped taking everything so damned serious.  1 in 6 have stopped talking to a family member because of an election?  What the hell is wrong with people.  That's almost as crazy as people having contempt for people they interact with online.  If you're finding yourself having contempt for someone online it's time to throw your phone away, ban yourself from all social media and seek help.

 

[matuski]

This thread really should be in the political forum.

That place breeds contempt.

 

[rockaction]

Arthur Brooks has always been an interesting guy. To go to a point made upthread, he did not hire Gingrich nor does he really have the say others think he might. He acts and reacts to donors, contributors, etc. He oversees the place and is its point man, but I don't know how responsible he is for those that came before. In other words, he's not going to come into a situation and start firing people. That's not what the face of a think tank does. He or she sets the overall tone for the institution. 

I remember AEI in DC when Christopher DeMuth was there. It was a neo-conservative foreign policy and old school social science place, coupled with some economic heavy hitters. It had been more of a business and industry-oriented place, but during the seventies and eighties, they had branched out.  

Anyway, cool op-ed. Good to see the sentiment; it's one I largely agree with.  

 

[TobiasFunke]

A good place to start would be if people stopped taking everything so damned serious.  1 in 6 have stopped talking to a family member because of an election?  What the hell is wrong with people.  That's almost as crazy as people having contempt for people they interact with online.  If you're finding yourself having contempt for someone online it's time to throw your phone away, ban yourself from all social media and seek help.

 

[tonydead]

 

[DallasDMac]

A good place to start would be if people stopped taking everything so damned serious.  1 in 6 have stopped talking to a family member because of an election?  What the hell is wrong with people.  That's almost as crazy as people having contempt for people they interact with online.  If you're finding yourself having contempt for someone online it's time to throw your phone away, ban yourself from all social media and seek help.

No kidding. Don't you just hate people that overreact? Oh, wait...

 

[Leroy Hoard]

This thread really should be in the political forum.

That place breeds contempt.

Yes, this is a diseased thread. It should be quarantined with all the other sick threads.

 

[KCitons]

No kidding. Don't you just hate people that overreact? Oh, wait...

Good point. When you respond in a thread with a sarcastic comment, it's also attacked as having a lack of empathy.