I used to debate with a friend of mine about videos or articles he forwarded to me. I took a lot of time to look at each point and if I had a problem with that point, i would research news articles, GAO reports, info from think tanks, whatever, that would show the other side of the issue. I would get back a simple blanket statement which would then have me debate that statement. He never put in the effort that I did and since I included links to signed, dated articles that had links within them showing what I believed and why, I finally gave up and said I no longer wish to spend time on these topics, but I value our friendship, so send me emails about how you are doing or jokes, etc, but let’s leave off politics.
He would still occasionally send a video and I said please do not send me a video that starts with a kernel of truth and then I have to stop the video, take the next point which is conjecture, and then provide the opposite viewpoint. He couldn’t help himself and finally I put him on a spam list. So now I rarely see his emails unless I check that folder. I told him that is what I had done because I couldn’t change his behavior, did not want to write him off, but did what I felt was necessary as to not belabor points that weren’t going to be discussed. Whatever I provided was ‘fake news’ whether it came from Fox News, the National Review, Reuters, the Guardian, whatever. He once said “I don’t need links because I know what I know”. I have on occasion used that phrase against him, that is when I engaged.
For about a year I did not get anything from him but then he sent me a video, after I asked him not to, and I reminded him I wasn’t interested in the video as the topic of the forwarded email was for those who said ‘never trump’. I replied if he had an article that I could look at I would be interested to see it. His response was ‘Apologies for the undesirable message as I thought it would touch your patriotic side... I was totally mistaken’. The implication is that if you don’t see my point of view, you are not patriotic. I thought my response might be helpful for some of you.
------------------------— email response ----------------------------—
Trust that if a person is a democrat or republican it has no bearing on them being a patriot. The name calling and slander of various sources of information is meant to divide us. And being a patriot means you believe in our constitution and our system of government, and even if you don’t, then being a patriot means to work to change the system to your ideals through contacting your representatives and through voting. I believe that is the message President Trump delivered to a lot of people speaking to their frustration, but I don’t agree with his personal behavior nor his policies. I don’t believe Iran is a significant military threat but current policies are escalating tensions which may result in a war that means someone’s kid(s) are going to die. I hope that whatever we do is worth the sacrifice of blood and treasure. I believe the Afghanistan and Iraq wars ran up a debt of 5.9 trillion dollars last time I looked and I wonder what did it really buy us? How could that have been spent to better things here – we all see the need to do something about our aging infrastructure for example.
The thought that anyone who is interested in how their government works and how it could work better for the values that they hold would not be a patriot (and I think you would agree) is simply wrong.
The old ‘my country right or wrong’ can only go so far.
For example I can be pro choice, but not in favor of abortion. I don’t feel like I can make that decision for another person, and I doubt that decision is taken lightly. There are places where people feel that a rapist has rights to be involved with the child that they forced on someone and that is a very difficult issue.
Another example I can be for better gun control legislation, but believe that people who are responsible, mentally stable, and law abiding should have access to firearms. Mentally stable again is very difficult. But the gun and gun violence issues which are big ones are almost meaningless when we consider the numbers of Americans that die from disease and traffic accidents. We’ve legislated air bags for example and that has made cars much safer. However, it’s the gun issue that has the passions inflamed on each side fanned by the media which seeks our attention.
I believe in the value of simple honest work and that people should be paid a living wage, so that the minimum wage should gradually be increased, which would bring millions of Americans out of poverty. Those who benefit by having cheap labor (and some even higher illegal aliens so they can pay even less) encourage a system that provides social supports so that people can work those jobs while maintaining company profitability and by that measure, ensure maximum bonus amounts for the top brass which might make up to 300 times a year what their employees make. For example Walmart and some fast food chains provide as a service to their employees information and assistance on how to sign up for government supports. I think we could agree that if less people receive those supports then that reduces the size of government, reduces the cost of government, and in turn reduces the deficit, the national debt, and finally, our tax rates.
One solution that I think would help Americans on the lowest rung would be to emulate the Japanese system of having the post office serve as a bank with no fees and provide accounts for people who don’t have much money and don’t get gouged on bank fees because they can’t have 1500 in a personal account balance of 5000 in a business account balance – which is how my bank works. While 10 or 15 bucks might not hurt us that much, for someone on the edge, that is 1 or 2 meals they have to miss, or they can’t take their kids to the dollar movie theater. A low wage earner who has to pay 3 to 5 dollars for check cashing again might have to miss a meal for that service, or to send money to a sick relative.
I also believe people should have access to health care at rates they can afford – a progressive system that works like our progressive income tax system.
If you disagree with any of those points then please comment on them. But these are typical issues where the two parties disagree. But do those values make any of us unpatriotic? If so, then why? Note I never said that people should not work to provide for themselves, nor not work to provide healthcare for themselves.
Our sales tax system is not progressive though. To buy a tire for a car has the same amount of taxes whether you make 20,000 a year or 2,000,000 a year and you can again imagine how that hurts the lowest rung. Not much we can do about that. Some can’t afford a car.
So I would ask you if you think that anything I have just typed is unpatriotic. If it is, please let me know why you think so because I would really like to know. I don’t see our nation as a thing, but rather as a collection of people , very diverse people, who have the right to life liberty and happiness. I think our system’s ‘table’ is tilted towards those who can write legislation and contribute enough money to have it heard and maybe get through government. I don’t think having access to money to get your way is fair or patriotic because that means I count more than you do. And while the constitution originally put land holders above the common man, that has been changed. I can provide links if you don’t trust me on this point, but most legislation these days is written by lobbyists and while not on the floor of either house, most congressmen have a budget of fundraising they have to make. If they are worried about raising money, then they have to listen to those who have the money to hand out, which means those people have a greater influence than we do as voters.
What also bothers me is that many people feel they are moral and religious and yet I don’t think our system reflects many of the ideals of what we were taught starting with that which you do to the least of me, you do to all of me.
What bothers me is that you did not address balanced communication – and perhaps we see that differently. For example, you like videos, and I like videos for entertainment, but not political ones. In a video they have neither the time nor inclination to give you the sources of what they believe and why. Therefore for me to be able to verify the information, I have to stop the video when I hear something I wonder about, and then go look up articles about a given point. Someone might make a point that is valid and then take that grain of truth and build up conjecture that does not follow.
I also have a problem with the President misrepresenting things especially when we can go back to videos to see what was said before, or look at the facts verified by the media, media watchdogs, and even the government accounting office. I believe speaking out about those things means you are patriot because you believe in your country and its citizens.
Lastly I believe you have every right to what you believe and that our country is built on debate and compromise and as long as we listen to each other and discuss/debate points then we are being patriots, because to negate someone’s view without considering it, or putting in personal attacks because something frightens you or you are uncomfortable with it goes against our constitutional rights and ultimately is unpatriotic.
I will always care about you and always look forward to seeing you.