2 ms·
I agree with the diagnosis, but I think there might be better solutions: not to do political distancing, but to make sure you interact more with politics from u
by slx26 6y ago
I agree with the diagnosis, but I think there might be better solutions: not to do political distancing, but to make sure you interact more with politics from up close than at a distance. When you are talking with others and you are physically there, you have to look at people in the eyes, you have to consider their points of view more thoroughly, their personal circumstances; you can hear them reply too and notice they are humans, and last but not least, you can't say random sh*t because someone might get annoyed and actually punch you in the face. There are a lot of feedback mechanisms that are lost when we are just writing on the internet or social media. It's much easier to do armchair reasoning, find the perfect victim for your biased narratives, ignore others selectively, etc.
And it's not that hard to explain to people. Just like we have been educating the general public on how to eat more healthily with the food pyramid, we should do the same with online interaction. Stating opinions online is ok from time to time, but if all your interaction with the "real world" is not on the "real world", you are probably missing perspective, and you might get sick with conspiracionist thinking, extreme political polarization, biased narrative poisoning. Which we are seeing that, when reaching enough people, start to become contagious even outside the internet.
It's totally possible to interact more responsibly on the internet and social media too, but we kinda need to understand what these environments are lacking compared to the "real world" and work on more healthy practices.