Why Good People Are Divided by Politics

This is a partial title from a great book from a content point of view (but not what I would consider fun reading ).  I’ve commented on this book on several occasions this summer in different blogs.  I think it is critical when approaching divisions in politics, culture, people.   The basic message is something I learned in college when debating abortion/life/choice issues.  I think most people (95%) are coming from a good place.  Even people who I consider misguided like Matthew Owen, Supervisor Fennell,  Supervisor Bohn or even Gary Graham Hughes (see Cannabis thread in the near future).  They are all coming from a good and righteous place.  It is just we fundamentally disagree on some issues.

This thread is for those disagreements.  Mostly in this thread I will be discussing, analyzing and trying to come to some conclusions about the divisions within the Humboldt Democratic Party.  I like to start this thread with Jonathan Haidts’ book because I don’t want to forget that idea as I begin this online journey.  We are all good people.  Sometimes in the heat of a debate, when the bickering gets it’s loudest, the reader (and/or commenter and/or I) might forget this momentarily.  The next day tho, lets remember that in the end we are all coming from a good place – for the most part.  🙂

 

General Blog Note:  I will feel free to edit my posts and comments for a short period of time after posting.  Most of the time these changes will be to try to clear of the meaning, sometimes like this morning I even changed the title and direction of the post after I initially posted another title (with no content).  I do feel a responsibility to keep my posts and others as long as they are not offensive.  After that initial period of change, if I make any changes or deletions – I will add a note saying I did so and why.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Why Good People Are Divided by Politics

  1. I guess I have to admit Matthew Owen is a good person, I’m sure he is. Thing is he is knowingly trying to beat politics to institute his policy preferences IMHO. His ethics are so different than mine that I it is difficult to write about him under this header. But if we don’t address policy debates in good faith, we are in trouble.

    But here is my response I posted over in Lost Coast Outpost today (9/4/13).

    With no internets. Paul Tsongas? I was not a Clintonite. I lived in Illinois at the time. I wanted that Mid Westerner whose name escapes me who called for the New New Deal. SOLD. Who did you vote for Matthew? GHWB? Ross Perot? – At least with Mr. Perot we might have some decent trade policies now and maybe a stronger manufacturing base?

    I have no love for DLC Democrats btw. They, with Republicans helped to destroy financial regulations that led directly to 2008. Have you heard Alan Greenspan’s mea culpa? Yeah, we had it wrong then and still do. We need more leaders like Elizabeth Warren to set us up for the future.

    Tom Harkin! That was the New New Deal Guy. Damn. Was Tsongas second?

    “It’s not about you.” Rich.
    *********************************************************************************

    Here is where Matthew is wrong. For him it is all about winning. Politics is a sport. No matter if the Democrat elected does not share Democratic values on the most important issue they will vote on as Supervisors. It just doesn’t matter. What does matter is selecting the candidate, and that is where Matthew excels. He would love to be in charge of hand picking the candidate XYZ so they could waltz into the position with a easy majority. Principles? Policies? Ideas? No matter. What matters is having the winning candidate. This is dangerous and poisons our local democracy.(And by the way, the principles, policies, and ideas DO matter to Matthew. They are the Republican principles, policies and ideas.)

    Miscellaneous digs at the Democratic Party that have to be called out…

    1) Opening quote – Lovely – “The Democratic Party is like a mule. If you hit ‘em over the head with a two-by-four often enough, it finally gets the message.”

    2) “Democrats were still thought of as long-haired, hippie-type, pot smoking, protesting radicals and weren’t taken seriously by the country”

    3) “Democrats are like a young woman. They want to be dated, courted, romanced and then make up their own minds. They don’t want to be told what to do.”

    Anti-women and anti-Democrat – a two-fer!

    And please notice this…Matthew will bloviate on and on regarding national elections, but never, ever state who local Candidate X or Candidate Y is. This is the information we’d like to hear because he has a great deal of insight. Of course he never will share that. Why? Because, as he tried to warn others, it IS all about him.

    Hi internets, Matthew does not respect anonymous posters, so I always have to add – This is Jon Yalcinkaya. Like Matthew Owen, I am an associate member of the Democrats.

  2. Politics is a funny thing. You get all the internal politics of any working place or organization. But on top of that you have actual politics. It is not always easy to navigate. Especially if one is trying to do what I am – publicize the internal differences.

    My first experience with conflicting Democratic priorities and democratic values has started. A group of “anarchists” to use a term of endearment that has been used and I have chosen to set up an alternative dinner and celebration because the sponsored dinner is taking place in the Ingomar Club (IC).

    There are only four of us so far, and all of us have different reasons. Some protest the Ingomar’s past as an all-male club, I have experienced outrageous anti-Muslim sentiments first hand from ONE member – yes only one, but that is enough for me to change where I choose to go. But deeper than that, and I think this might unite the 4 that are currently not interested in attending a dinner at the IC is the optics.

    I don’t think it is healthy for the Democrats as a group to have one of their signature events occur at an exclusive club that selects members in part by their ability to pay a hefty sum on a regular basis. It’s simply anti-democratic in my view and poor vision for Democratic goals going forward. (democratic = values of the majority of people, Democratic= values and goals of the Democratic Party. They should be the same IMHO)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s