Down With the Punchy Political Graphics!!
Wednesday, August 15, 2012 at 10:25PM We try to teach the next generation the value of kindness and compassion.
We talk to them of difference, acceptance and tolerance.
We discuss sportsmanship and compromise in elevated tones and disparage bullying and name calling.
Then, those little tornadoes go to bed and we jump on our blogs or the Facebook and post things like "Mitt Romney is big, fat stupid with his stupid magical underwear and I hope his stupid money catches on fire and that his stupid (handsome!) sons get hundreds of teenage girls pregnant so he knows why Planned Parenthood is useful and not stupid like him and his stupid magical {{repeat loop}}."
I won't lie, I thought these political updates of the graphic variety on Facebook and Twitter were super fun at first, but they're totally devoid of substantial intellectual discourse. Essentially, they convey that political belief can be boiled down to pithy sayings and badly put together graphics.
Politics should be complex, well thought out and discussed in a measured manner. If your stance on anything political can be summarized in a punchy graphic or even a series of them? My friend, I hate to break this to you, but you're doing it completely wrong.
Consider double checking the "Share" potential and its relevance to meaningful discourse of a graphic before doing so.
"Is this completely missing the point of the kind of consensus that led to the building of our great nation?"
Now, I know some smarty pants is going to point out that in the 19th century, Aaron Burr, then Vice President of the United States, shot and murdered Alexander Hamilton, then Secertary of the Treasury and that this does not at all point to consensus and yet our great nation was still built.
I'm talking about macro-consensus... big picture stuff, Smarty Pants. Also, my response to that, which you should feel free to use any time someone points out a historical situation that may undermine a point you're trying to make, is this: "That was before the Internet."
So, okay. Let's try this instead.
"If I were in charge of modeling appropriate behavior to a small child who knows nothing of the world, would my behavior be a reflection of who I believe I am?"
Your values are only real if you practice them with integrity. Integrity loosely means "wholeness." Which I will loosely interpret as "as much of the time as is humanly possible" because I know even the best of us have our bad days.
If you're going to share something like this, for example:
Please stop telling your kids not to bully people. Don't tell them it's not nice to call people "dumb" or "stupid." Because that would make you a hypocrite -- one who is lacking in integrity.
I think Mitt Romney is a poor choice for a president.
I think Barack Obama is a better choice.
My reasons are complex, well thought out and are not based on assuming there are "thousands of dumb things he hasn't said." Don't get me wrong, he's said some dumb things. But who hasn't? I bet President Obama has said dumb things.
Once or twice.
Kidding, because as someone who believes heavily in compassion as a value, I will not champion dialogue that is not only dispassionate, but blatantly and gleefully cruel.I know this is a time honored tradition in the realm of politics -- mud slinging, berating, insulting. But... that was... before the Internet?
Tariq reminded me the other night that one of the easiest ways to change a dynamic is to assume the best of intentions on the part of the other. I assume that people who support Mr. Romney have good intentions and I'm very interested in those intentions. I'm not going to make assumptions about them because I know what it feels like to have people make assumptions about me. I will most likely not agree with them on many things, but I will be a more thoughtful person because I know how they feel and why they feel it. In that way, I win. We all win.
I will also not turn politics into moral judgment. I find it interesting how many of my fellow liberals will eschew our conservative countrypersons as injecting their personal morality into politics, yet have no problem making sweeping statements about how people who don't support universal health care think it's okay for people to die. News flash? That's a moral argument. I also seriously doubt anyone wants anyone to die. Point is, if you're posting stuff like that on your Facebook wall, you will never know the truth of the matter because you've initiated a conversation by automatically putting someone on the defensive.
And... telling them that they want people to die. I mean.
Seriously?
That's not going anywhere productive.
Like, ever.
Obama, barack obama, civil discourse, democracy, dialogue, mitt romnery, politics in Politics
Reader Comments (20)
You make very good points. I've always been rather amazed at how parents don't seem to look and see that their actions are so much louder than any words they might speak.
I'm so guilty of this myself. I've told my children that we are to love others, but then they've watched me cuss out the driver who cut me off.
Politics are so complex. So much more complex than a slogan here or a some-ecard facebook meme there. People have their beliefs for a reason and I always learn the most when I take the time to understand why a person believes what they believe rather than try to beat them down to think like I think. Heck, I might just be wrong.
I agree that the above LOLRomney is pretty silly. There are those that might think that a LOLObama would have made a better point. Whatever. I most always (I added the "most" upon further review) try to assume the best of the other point of view as well. It's difficult in this world. It's something to aspire to, I think. At least it's something I aspire to. Bad grammar and all in those last few sentences.
And I just used "pithy" in a blog post today a well. I used it more often, so na-na-neh-foo-foo!
Mitt Romney needs to die in a fire.
See what I did there/
I actually think that political viewpoints can be boiled down to simple one-sentence statements.
"Supports equal rights for everyone."
"Doesn't support abortion under any circumstance."
"Believes in the trickle-down effect."
These are statements that are true and representative of someone's political viewpoint, so why is it a bad thing to stick it on a photo of the candidate for easy digestion by those with short attention spans?
Like this graphic that Dave posted in his post http://www.blogography.com/archives/2012/08/rr.html:
(I guess you don't allow embedding of images: http://www.blogography.com/photos57/RyanB.jpg)
I think that's an accurate representation of one of the many things for which he stands.
I think some of these are quite funny...
HOWEVER...
I don't think it fosters conversation. One of the things that frustrates me about today's political climate is the lack of cooperation and compromise. Our government was designed with checks and balances that were meant to assure some sort of meeting of the minds, but we have moved so far away from that I wonder if we'll ever get back. We need give and take; there are viable, common-sense ideas on both sides of the aisle that should be heard (and the crazies need to be shut down). We need conversation, not a bunch of one-liners.
I'm friends with one of my neighbors who is staunchly Tea Party. In fact, she works with them at a national level. Woman is 70 years old and is working harder than my husband. Seriously. Not only that, but her best friend, a Republican rep in the GA House of Reps, was just ousted in the primary by a 22-year-old upstart Republican. Knowing this, what's awesome about her is that she didn't whine that her friend lost. She was so excited that the 22-year-old candidate who won was able to encourage young people to vote in this past primary. Seeing all the high school and college students out voting made her happy. She's ecstatic when at least 100 Democrats show up for a local primary because, really, this is Georgia. You're either Republican or dead down here. She LOVES the process and loves it when people vote, however they vote, just as long as they're having their say. And she never speaks a bad word about the people who aren't of her political bent.
I wish we were all like that and I want to be like her when I grow up. ;)
Thanks for this, Faiqa!
Isn't Roseanne Barr running? Or maybe she dropped out. I really never got to hear her platform on economics, abortion, diplomatic relations, and the current nature of dick jokes with stand-up comics.
I wonder if this is why that @paulryangosling Twitter account just bums me out? I wonder if I've lost my sense of humor, or maybe I do just want things to be stated plainly, not sarcastically, at this point? (I am scaring myself, talking like some kind of adult person.)
Your point about modeling behavior that we then condemn (as parents or otherwise) is a good one. I admit that I took great delight in belittling GWB's intellect as a coping mechanism for the entire 2000s. Now I think I've just shorted out, through years of polarizing e-mail forwards (that actually changed family relationships, sadly) and now Facebook memes. It's really easy to scribble some words over a picture, but it feeds into this often abusive soundbite culture we've got going on, and I'm not sure it helps to clarify issues at all.
Thanks for letting me work out how I feel about this in your comments. ;)
I find I am getting less rabid about my politics lately and more interested in understanding how and why my fellow citizens feel they way they do. I'm more interested in being a progressive - one who chooses progress - than a liberal or a Democrat or a resident of any particular wing.
the mud slinging of politics hurt my heart. i'm not usually all negative, but i swear this shit is gonna sink our country.
While I agree with Miss Britt about being progressive, I am now totally disinterested in why other people have arrived at the place where they would honestly see choosing Romney as a positive thing. When we lived closer to St.Louis I could always count on having one democratic friend. Here in Southeast Missouri, I am constantly subjected to the hatred and vitriol of republicans in our area.we live in one of the poorest counties in Missouri, where people are literally surviving because of the social programs espoused by President Obama. And still, they will vote for any republican they can find.
I'm sorry that just doesn't fly with me, and I'm tired of trying to figure out why they would vote against their own well-being. Sigh...
I am so, sooo sick of politics. I hate ALL politicians. They're just puppets. People are sheeple. Everyone loves a reason to whip out the pitchforks. It is damned depressing.
Ah, yes! Nailed it, my friend. I love your line "because I know what it feels like to have people make assumptions about me." Thank you for your honesty. THIS kind of dialogue is what gets people turning. You are a brilliant thinker and writer.
Write on.
K
Okay, I've been thinking about this post trying to formulate a response and here it is: I'm just too mad to care. I'm too angry that people's human, civil, and reproductive rights are constantly on the table. How in the hell am I supposed to engage in rational conversation with people who honestly believe that I am less important than a cluster of cells that may be living in my uterus? How can I speak to people who believe that health care is a privilege and not a right? How do I engage with people who truly feel that my gay cousin/neighbor/friend is an abomination in the eyes of the lord and deserves neither safety nor simple human happiness? I think you're giving people too much credit. They know that their beliefs, when carried out to their logical conclusions, will result in death. Illegal abortion? Dead women. No affordable preventative care? Dead people (including children). A culture of fear that victimizes the LGTBQ community? Dead members. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Please tell me how to do that. Because I think you're right but I just don't know how.
My household is voting "No Confidence" this election year. We think both candidates are terrible ideas for this country, and I think we need to reexamine what it really is we want in a leader, and in a government. And yes, we need consensus.
I am absolutely certain that this is an ignorant, childlike, agnostic way to look at it, so I'm going to of course say it anyway: When your head is covered you look gorgeous and mysterious to me. When your head is not covered you look gorgeous and powerful but also vulnerable to me.
Um, that was meant for the post before it. I have nothing to say for this post. :) I'll copy it to the other one. BYE!
BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN
Why American men should boycott American women
http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/
I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don't know how to cook or clean, don't want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?
American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.
This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.
Tens of millions of American men have had their lives completely destroyed by American women through the following crimes:
1. False rape accusations (it has been proven that up to 80 percent of rape accusations are FALSE)
2. False domestic violence (DV) charges (same as above)
3. False sexual harassment charges (men are now afraid to even talk to women in the office because all it takes is one woman to make up a false sexual harassment charge and then the man's career is finished)
4. Financial destruction of men in divorce courts through alimony and support payments (women get up to 95 percent of their ex-husband's income and savings, as well as the house, car, etc)
5. Emotional destruction of men by ex-wives who have stolen their children from them and forbidden the fathers from having custody or contact with their own children
6. Divorced dads who commit suicide as a result
99.9 percent of American and western women are liars, hypocrities, and criminals, who support women committing crimes against men. Women refuse to condemn their fellow women who destroy men's lives. Silence means consent. Therefore, American women support and enjoy destroying men's lives and causing men to commit suicide. Apparently, American women think it is okay to be a criminal, just as long as you are a woman. Therefore, is it any surprise that a huge percent of American men no longer want anything to do with American women, other than using them for easy sex and then throwing them away?
A few more reasons to stay away from American women?
-25 percent of American women take psychiatric drugs for mental illnesses.
-25 percent of women under the age of 30 have at least one STD.
-85 percent of divorces in America are INITIATED by women, thus women are responsible for the vast majority of divorces.
-70 percent of criminals in America were raised by single mothers, thus feminism is responsible for most crime in America.
-The majority of child molestation, child abuse, and child murder in America is done by WOMEN.
Over 50 percent of American women are single, without a boyfriend or husband; so the fact is most American men no longer want to marry American women. Let these worthless American women grow old living alone with their 10 cats.
BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!
Someone as well spoken as Obama has less of a chance of uttering something dumb or stupid - at least to those of us that are equally appreciative of a well-spoken leader.
@ Chloe Jeffreys:
It's a very difficult thing to do, I think, to see someone else's side. Particularly when it comes to issues where the perception of human rights or social welfare is being contested. So very hard to stay compassionate in those situations.
@B.E. Earl:
Yes, I think the most we can do is aspire and that will often lead to actually dpi
@RW:
I do see what you did there. You're very tricky.
@Avitable:
My point was that these one liners don't encourage discussion or compassion. Productive political discourse is not just about telling someone what you believe -- it's about trying to understand the other person's point of view and IF POSSIBLE coming to a point of compromise. While you are correct about positions being able to be boiled down to one liners on graphics, those graphics are symbolic of the devolution of our ability to talk to each other about political topics in an empathetic way.
@Megan:
I feel the same… the conversations that need to be had aren't being had. Period.
@Coal Miner's Granddaughter:
And, for me, this person you describe is someone who is "very political" in the best sense. It seems we've forgotten that politics is discussion and participation. Not just identity.
@Delfin Joaquin Paris III:
You clearly missed the press release where she named you as a potential running mate. I think your experience with dick jokes is going to be a real asset.
@ Laurie:
Paul Ryan Gosling? Now THAT is funny. Kidding. It's exactly the ramifications of the sound byte culture that I'm talking about.
@Miss Britt:
I will most likely always identify as a liberal. In terms of identifying as a "progressive", I try to only use that label when it concerns religion or social issues (feminism, racism, etc). I don't know if I believe in progressivism as it applies to our government in that I don't think we "get better" in the running of a state just that we can become more efficient and less wasteful. I know that seems like the same thing, but I feel like there's a fine distinction.
@hello haha narf:
It's strange to me that grown people can't abide by the rule of playground politeness.
@Becca:
Your point is a good one.
@ Sybil Law:
It's their job to be unlikable, I think. And the less you like them, the more likely it is that they're doing their job. Or being Mitt Romney. I don't know.
@Kim:
Hey, thank YOU for noticing! :-)
@Errin:
Your comment is incredible. I'm working on it. Give me some time to think of a response of how we can do this.
@Allyson: I understand the impulse to not to vote, I really do. But you should vote because a vote isn't just a statement supporting a candidate, it's a vote stating that you believe in our process. Unless you don't. Which is fine.
@John Rambo Sometimes when girls won't go out with you, you should maybe try flowers instead.
@martymankins It's true. He's very well spoken. But he makes mistakes, too. Remember that time he told Hillary she was "likable enough". Wait. He might have had a point there.