3 ms·

I may not receive the same sympathy I had in the previous reply, but I do believe that the way the past administration (and their NGO and think tank satellites)

I may not receive the same sympathy I had in the previous reply, but I do believe that the way the past administration (and their NGO and think tank satellites) "promoted" (enforced) an agenda of "liberal" values (LGBT, abortion, hollywoodian feminism, "democracy", etc...) and regime change to all countries that fail at least in one item of the checklist (and even some that comply with all of them, like Brazil). I do think that the current situation is a huge backlash of the past (and recent) politics.

grzm 10y ago
Right. I understand where you're coming from. What I'm trying to get at is why include that in your comment. Part of the problem in US politics right now is the intense polarization and division people feel. There's been a lot of people expressing that their voices haven't been heard. While it's of course important to look at the past to figure out what has and hasn't worked when looking at what we want to the future, I think focussing on the division rather than on what we want to do to improve the situation hurts, rather than helps. (And it's not like everything was perfect and peachy prior to 8 years ago either.)
- owebmaster 10y ago
  I agree with you. But the mainstream narrative also don't talk about everything not been perfect the last 8 years, and bad stuff done by/during Obama administration are just now starting to be a problem to the media (and consequently, to a huge parcel of citizens that follow the trend). As someone said, where were the strikes and protests when Obama were conducting drones missions or the destruction of Libya, Syria, Somalia, etc? It is bad to keep deepen division, but it is a lot worse if one party takes over everything owning the narrative of "the good side" in a very illegitimate way, which is exactly what is developing in the USA right now. I feel very sorry about it, it is very similar to what happened here in Brazil and it got us to a coup d'etat.
  - grzm 10y ago
    Let's try to leave the mainstream narrative to the side, at least not have it front and center, while we're on HN. Likewise with the accusations of hypocrisy or disingenuity. If I thought it would be helpful, I'd include other examples from colors of the political spectrum, but that would just anger whoever feels that's unfair. It's really difficult to move forward together on issues people share in common when everyone insists on bringing up everything anyone associated with some idea is brought up as a point of contention. We have to figure out a way forward together. We're not going to agree on everything, but I honestly believe many of us have common cause on a lot of fundamental issues.
    - owebmaster 10y ago
      Although I agree with you, this lecturing tone is part of the problem. You don't want to be divisive? It is important to be empathetic. Common ground is, you know, common ground. Not people moving heavily to one side.
      - grzm 10y ago
        Point taken. What improvements or changes would you recommend in my approach? What in particular comes across as lecturing? (Oh, and please don't blame or associate my lecturing with any particular side: that's really just me. The polarization of the current political environment has contributors from both "sides", and any solution has to come from people in general.) Any phrases or statements you find particularly ineffective? Anything that would be more effective? I don't think I've staked out any position other than not trying to be careful to refrain from using language that is needlessly divisive. I haven't intended to move anyone to any particular side, so I'm interested in knowing what came across as doing so. People are often unaware of how things they say may come across, and I'm no different. Edited to add: This is tough stuff to talk about constructively. Thanks for sticking with me. I appreciate it.

grzm 10y ago

Right. I understand where you're coming from. What I'm trying to get at is why include that in your comment. Part of the problem in US politics right now is the intense polarization and division people feel. There's been a lot of people expressing that their voices haven't been heard. While it's of course important to look at the past to figure out what has and hasn't worked when looking at what we want to the future, I think focussing on the division rather than on what we want to do to improve the situation hurts, rather than helps. (And it's not like everything was perfect and peachy prior to 8 years ago either.)

owebmaster 10y ago
I agree with you. But the mainstream narrative also don't talk about everything not been perfect the last 8 years, and bad stuff done by/during Obama administration are just now starting to be a problem to the media (and consequently, to a huge parcel of citizens that follow the trend). As someone said, where were the strikes and protests when Obama were conducting drones missions or the destruction of Libya, Syria, Somalia, etc? It is bad to keep deepen division, but it is a lot worse if one party takes over everything owning the narrative of "the good side" in a very illegitimate way, which is exactly what is developing in the USA right now. I feel very sorry about it, it is very similar to what happened here in Brazil and it got us to a coup d'etat.
- grzm 10y ago
  Let's try to leave the mainstream narrative to the side, at least not have it front and center, while we're on HN. Likewise with the accusations of hypocrisy or disingenuity. If I thought it would be helpful, I'd include other examples from colors of the political spectrum, but that would just anger whoever feels that's unfair. It's really difficult to move forward together on issues people share in common when everyone insists on bringing up everything anyone associated with some idea is brought up as a point of contention. We have to figure out a way forward together. We're not going to agree on everything, but I honestly believe many of us have common cause on a lot of fundamental issues.
  - owebmaster 10y ago
    Although I agree with you, this lecturing tone is part of the problem. You don't want to be divisive? It is important to be empathetic. Common ground is, you know, common ground. Not people moving heavily to one side.
    - grzm 10y ago
      Point taken. What improvements or changes would you recommend in my approach? What in particular comes across as lecturing? (Oh, and please don't blame or associate my lecturing with any particular side: that's really just me. The polarization of the current political environment has contributors from both "sides", and any solution has to come from people in general.) Any phrases or statements you find particularly ineffective? Anything that would be more effective? I don't think I've staked out any position other than not trying to be careful to refrain from using language that is needlessly divisive. I haven't intended to move anyone to any particular side, so I'm interested in knowing what came across as doing so. People are often unaware of how things they say may come across, and I'm no different. Edited to add: This is tough stuff to talk about constructively. Thanks for sticking with me. I appreciate it.