Zonie63
Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: philosophy
Now my next question is, as we've pretty much established the existence of polarisation as an inevitable element in out lives, is it possible to have too much or too little of it? Is there a goldilocks zone for polarisation?
I think we can all imagine the result of too much polarisation. Civil war, neighbour against neighbour, all that sort of thing.
However, too little may be unhealthy too. I wonder if, without at least some polarisation, we lose perspective culturally? Without having someone in our society who disagrees with us, do we lose the opportunity to test our truths.......the loss of which, I'd argue, is to our detriment.
Where's the sweet spot in this?
I think that there will always be some degree of polarization, and I agree that a certain amount is probably healthy for a functional free and democratic society. I think that it's only become an issue nowadays because we've lived in kind of an insular bubble these past decades, and now that the real world is starting to show through the cracks, people don't know what to do.
One thing I remember about the 1960s and 70s, as opposed to the 1980s and later, is that there was no political correctness (for lack of a better term) back in those days. Political speech seemed more frank and to the point, but at some point, it started to get watered down and sanitized for the public's comfort and protection.
Some in this thread mentioned McCarthy, and while he was most definitely polarizing, the fact that he was exposed in the light of day for who and what he was eventually brought about his downfall.
Overall, people tended to be straight talkers back then, whereas nowadays, people have to dress up their language and talk around issues in order to not offend anyone and (supposedly) cause polarization.
But it's also possible that by society making an active and conscious effort to avoid polarization, we may have unwittingly fed into it.
Because of an active effort to avoid saying anything offensive, insensitive, or mean-spirited, people might be more inclined to keep their thoughts to themselves on a public or mainstream level, while discussing issues privately or semi-privately (such as in internet forums) with those who are like-minded, creating an atmosphere analogous to groupthink. Like-minded people in the same place bouncing the same opinions off each other in a kind of feel-good circle jerk, without leaving much room for outside or opposing commentary. No wonder the fur and feathers fly when two opposing groups eventually come into contact with each other (or when one trolls another's message board).
Some of it may also be social as well. A lot of things have changed culturally and socially in this country. People don't know their neighbors like they used to. There's no real sense of community spirit or volunteerism or anything to pull people together. There doesn't seem to be any basis for unity anymore. Even within the major political parties, it seems more like a cacophony of different factions, each with their own individual pet cause. The reason why we end up with the politicians we do is because they're trying to please a disparate consensus within their own parties. The problem with that is that when you end up trying to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody.
Other aspects of society which have changed might be shown in the way neighborhoods are built, then and now. I remember in some of the older neighborhoods I've been in, there were no fences between houses and yards. No real barriers, unless someone had a pool, in which case a fence was required by law. But in some of the more recent neighborhoods, every house has a walled-in yard. There were no homeowner associations or gated communities back in the old days either. Stores didn't have surveillance and shoplifter detectors all over the place. The friendly mom-and-pop type establishments have been replaced by corporate-defined forced courtesy drones. Dealing with any kind of corporate or government bureaucracy these days gives a new meaning to the word "hell." This may not be directly related to the potential for greater polarization, but it does seem to add to the overall tension in society, the "me first" mentality, and the general sense of "us vs. them" which exists.
|
RE: Polar Apposite? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread