Justice Ginsburg And Different Opinions (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

Probably naive, but I'm hoping we might consider something beyond policy and doctrine and conservative and liberal.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg seemed to me like a person who did a great job of earning respect even from people who disagreed with her.

I wrote this a few years ago when Justice Scalia passed. It was about her as much as him. And hopefully about us. 

 

[AAABatteries]

“Her feminist friends gave me a hard time because she rode behind me on the elephant,” Justice Scalia said.

Justice Ginsburg shot back, “It was a matter of distribution of weight.”

 

[AAABatteries]

And speaking of elephants - it's difficult to have this conversation today because of the elephant in the room.  I won't go there as I know that's not what you want Joe.  I'll just say that it used to be interesting and fun to debate and discuss ideas with folks.  Very few people want to do that any more.  It feels like there's no middle ground - you are either for us or against us.

 

[bigbottom]

With Scalia’s and RBG’s passing, the Court is a whole lot less interesting. 

By the way, that’s a good article Joe. Thanks for writing it. 

 

[AAABatteries]

With Scalia’s and RBG’s passing, the Court is a whole lot less interesting.

  Not a beer fan I take it.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Heard several lawyers last night say they were honored in having to gain her respect when presenting to SCOTUS. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

And speaking of elephants - it's difficult to have this conversation today because of the elephant in the room.  I won't go there as I know that's not what you want Joe.  I'll just say that it used to be interesting and fun to debate and discuss ideas with folks.  Very few people want to do that any more.  It feels like there's no middle ground - you are either for us or against us.

I think it's maybe helpful to go there and to identify why it's difficult to have the conversation.

I'm not sure what you are thinking there but for me, the elephant is the lack of empathy which results in us demonizing the "other". Any Biden Voter is place in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Trump voter thinks is awful. Any Trump Voter is placed in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Biden voter thinks is awful.

I've voted the Democrat for POTUS every times since Bill Clinton's first term. And some of my closest friends have voted for the Republican for POTUS every time since then. 

We have a weekly Friday afternoon beer session that is our version of the Scalia - Ginsburg dinner but with normal intelligence people. 

We can do it. Scaila and Ginsburg did it. 

But we seem to be in the tiny minority that can. 

My gut feel is it's because I love my friends and my friends love me for reasons bigger than who they vote for. I'm guessing that was the case for Scalia and Ginsburg.

The problem with that though is loving someone and knowing them well enough to feel like you know their heart does not scale. 

And it takes some work.

It's just way easier to demonize and mock and belittle and insult the "other". So we have what we have. 

 

[AAABatteries]

I think it's maybe helpful to go there and to identify why it's difficult to have the conversation.

I'm not sure what you are thinking there but for me, the elephant is the lack of empathy which results in us demonizing the "other". Any Biden Voter is place in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Trump voter thinks is awful. Any Trump Voter is placed in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Biden voter thinks is awful.

I've voted the Democrat for POTUS every times since Bill Clinton's first term. And some of my closest friends have voted for the Republican for POTUS every time since then. 

We have a weekly Friday afternoon beer session that is our version of the Scalia - Ginsburg dinner but with normal intelligence people. 

We can do it. Scaila and Ginsburg did it. 

But we seem to be in the tiny minority that can. 

My gut feel is it's because I love my friends and my friends love me for reasons bigger than who they vote for. I'm guessing that was the case for Scalia and Ginsburg.

The problem with that though is loving someone and knowing them well enough to feel like you know their heart does not scale. 

And it takes some work.

It's just way easier to demonize and mock and belittle and insult the "other". So we have what we have. 

I don't disagree with your point but I will just say that for many people 2016 changed things.  Maybe I wasn't paying attention in 2000 or 2008 and that's when the demonizing started - it seems like both sides want to argue about that too.  I just can state that, FOR ME, I've only seen one individual who I felt has intentionally tried to drive a wedge between the sides and actively make it an us vs. them.  Every person that proceeded him I felt at least tried to empathize with the other side and/or tried to persuade the other side that they were wrong.  This person isn't interested in anything but themself and it's hard for many people to take those who support him and vote for him seriously any more.  That doesn't make those people who vote for him bad people - but I can at least understand why some people have a real problem with reconciling it because I'm in the boat.

Apologies if you feel like I'm getting off on a tangent you don't want. 

 

[quick-hands]

I think it's maybe helpful to go there and to identify why it's difficult to have the conversation.

I'm not sure what you are thinking there but for me, the elephant is the lack of empathy which results in us demonizing the "other". Any Biden Voter is place in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Trump voter thinks is awful. Any Trump Voter is placed in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Biden voter thinks is awful.

I've voted the Democrat for POTUS every times since Bill Clinton's first term. And some of my closest friends have voted for the Republican for POTUS every time since then. 

We have a weekly Friday afternoon beer session that is our version of the Scalia - Ginsburg dinner but with normal intelligence people. 

We can do it. Scaila and Ginsburg did it. 

But we seem to be in the tiny minority that can. 

My gut feel is it's because I love my friends and my friends love me for reasons bigger than who they vote for. I'm guessing that was the case for Scalia and Ginsburg.

The problem with that though is loving someone and knowing them well enough to feel like you know their heart does not scale. 

And it takes some work.

It's just way easier to demonize and mock and belittle and insult the "other". So we have what we have. 

It is a thing we lost.   It was called tolerance.

 

[quick-hands]

I don't disagree with your point but I will just say that for many people 2016 changed things.  Maybe I wasn't paying attention in 2000 or 2008 and that's when the demonizing started - it seems like both sides want to argue about that too.  I just can state that, FOR ME, I've only seen one individual who I felt has intentionally tried to drive a wedge between the sides and actively make it an us vs. them.  Every person that proceeded him I felt at least tried to empathize with the other side and/or tried to persuade the other side that they were wrong.  This person isn't interested in anything but themself and it's hard for many people to take those who support him and vote for him seriously any more.  That doesn't make those people who vote for him bad people - but I can at least understand why some people have a real problem with reconciling it because I'm in the boat.

Apologies if you feel like I'm getting off on a tangent you don't want. 

Bush as Hitler was a tad divisive.   Pushing little old ladies off cliffs, divisive.   Harry Reid admitting he didn't know if Romney paid his taxes or not but it didn't matter cuz his side won, divisive.    Being called a rascist and fascist cuz i support trump.     Politics is politics i guess.   Its where we are.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't disagree with your point but I will just say that for many people 2016 changed things.  Maybe I wasn't paying attention in 2000 or 2008 and that's when the demonizing started - it seems like both sides want to argue about that too.  I just can state that, FOR ME, I've only seen one individual who I felt has intentionally tried to drive a wedge between the sides and actively make it an us vs. them.  Every person that proceeded him I felt at least tried to empathize with the other side and/or tried to persuade the other side that they were wrong.  This person isn't interested in anything but themself and it's hard for many people to take those who support him and vote for him seriously any more.  That doesn't make those people who vote for him bad people - but I can at least understand why some people have a real problem with reconciling it because I'm in the boat.

Apologies if you feel like I'm getting off on a tangent you don't want. 

Thanks. And no, I think this is a tangent worth being on. Likely, it's a main point and not a tangent.

I don't think it can all be laid at the feet of Trump. At all. 

The Scalia - Ginsburg article I wrote and linked to was written in February of 2016. 

I've no doubt that Trump's style fanned the flame. But I'm more interested in the flame. 

I'm more interested in assuming the best of another.

Of trying to understand the other and where they're coming from. 

I just don't know to do that well outside of people who personally know you. 

 

[bigbottom]

I think it's maybe helpful to go there and to identify why it's difficult to have the conversation.

I'm not sure what you are thinking there but for me, the elephant is the lack of empathy which results in us demonizing the "other". Any Biden Voter is place in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Trump voter thinks is awful. Any Trump Voter is placed in the box that generalizes whatever evil thing the Biden voter thinks is awful.

I've voted the Democrat for POTUS every times since Bill Clinton's first term. And some of my closest friends have voted for the Republican for POTUS every time since then. 

We have a weekly Friday afternoon beer session that is our version of the Scalia - Ginsburg dinner but with normal intelligence people. 

We can do it. Scaila and Ginsburg did it. 

But we seem to be in the tiny minority that can. 

My gut feel is it's because I love my friends and my friends love me for reasons bigger than who they vote for. I'm guessing that was the case for Scalia and Ginsburg.

The problem with that though is loving someone and knowing them well enough to feel like you know their heart does not scale. 

And it takes some work.

It's just way easier to demonize and mock and belittle and insult the "other". So we have what we have. 

Wait, am I missing something?  Are people not friends IRL with people on the other side of the political spectrum? I though this was completely normal and commonplace. I’m friends with people all over the spectrum (heck, I live in Texas, I’d have to be).  But I also have dear friends in California that are all over the place politically. Meeting up with five couples in Sedona in two weeks and the group runs from traditional conservative to hippie liberal. It’s never been an issue. This can’t possibly be a “tiny minority” as you suggest.

Now, if you’re talking about online interactions, I’m with you. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

This can’t possibly be a “tiny minority” as you suggest.

Now, if you’re talking about online interactions, I’m with you. 

In my experience, it seems like people gravitate toward becoming close friends with those who share similar political views.

I said it seems to me that close friends like Scalia and Ginsberg and the relationship I have with some of my closest friends is a tiny minority.

If you don't think that can possibly be true, that's great.

I don't see a whole lot of strong Biden supporters and strong Trump supporters that are best friends. 

I see real life and online interactions as not that different in this regard. But again, if you don't that's awesome. 

 

[bigbottom]

In my experience, it seems like people gravitate toward becoming close friends with those who share similar political views.

I said it seems to me that close friends like Scalia and Ginsberg and the relationship I have with some of my closest friends is a tiny minority.

If you don't think that can possibly be true, that's great.

I don't see a whole lot of strong Biden supporters and strong Trump supporters that are best friends. 

I see real life and online interactions as not that different in this regard. But again, if you don't that's awesome. 

Yeah, thankfully that is a completely foreign concept to me in my 32 years as an adult living in both blue and red states. And as you extend out exponentially, all my friends have close friends of different political stripes. So it’s not just me. It’s pretty much everyone I’m friends with (I’m having trouble coming up with a counterexample).

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don't know what the political views of many of my friends are. Some post their views all over social media, so that's hard to miss. But the ones who don't do that ... I'd just be guessing if I had to try to describe their political views.

Political discussions, aside from at family gatherings, are almost entirely online in my experience.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't know what the political views of many of my friends are. Some post their views all over social media, so that's hard to miss. But the ones who don't do that ... I'd just be guessing if I had to try to describe their political views.

Political discussions, aside from at family gatherings, are almost entirely online in my experience.

Thanks @Maurile Tremblay  It's an interesting discussion. I don't know how normal it is that my friends and I are all very well aware of each other's political views. It's an interesting thing.

 

[Shutout]

The internet makes brave bullies of us all. We lose compassion, respect, tolerance, empathy, etc, etc, because we can and there are no consequences. 

We adopted the echo chamber model social media has been teaching us for two decades and this is what we now reap. As a result, we heavily gravitate towards those who share our thoughts and support us. 

As a result, especially for the younger ones among us, we tend to congregate with like-minded people much more than previous generations did. There is a reason the older folks used to tell us don't discuss politics, religion, etc, at the dinner table with company.  Its because back then , we still mingled heavily across the spectrum and we were always interacting with people of various views.  Nowadays, we tend to be in isolated pods of like-thinkers and, honestly, we don't handle differing opinions as well or with as much tact.