DECEMBER 12, 2023 – Like many of my readers—“left,” “right,” or “center” or all three at once but among a swath of issues—my hair’s set on fire every time I stick my head above the trench and into the trajectories of bombs and bullets of “Breaking News.” In some cases—most notably, Ukraine, Gaza, and gun violence in America—the projectiles are real. Otherwise, the shots and explosives are metaphorical, at least so far, but can poison heart and mind as much as mustard gas can destroy sight and lungs. As much as I know how dangerous it is to watch the raging battles, I have a hard time crouching down in relative safety, let alone neutrality.
For now, however, I’m avoiding active public engagement in the ongoing political warfare. I’m forgoing political commentary on this blog—with the exception of a “side-dig” now and again. This self-initiated policy of keeping my head down and mouth closed doesn’t mean I’ve surrendered to a hopeless or head-in-sand attitude concerning the issues of our time. Nor have I withdrawn from involvement in the political process, as dysfunctional as that process might be. (I certainly plan to vote and help get out the vote.) And I enthusiastically favor the liberal exercise of First Amendment rights, lest they atrophy in the face of authoritarian forces.
Yet at the same time the world is so full of political yammering, I need to stand back and take better stock of how I might improve the discourse. I have yet to formulate a good, actionable idea for myself in this regard. When I do, I’ll emerge from the trench and let you know.
Meanwhile, I must confess discouragement prompted by recent research[1] suggesting that what we post online has negligible influence on people whose thinking we desperately want to change. In fact, the research points to an unnerving conclusion: if what I post is likely to influence anyone, it’s me! For example, if I’m a “7” on a 1 to 10 scale of vehemence regarding my opinion on one topic or another and I post my opinion, I’m more likely to move to an “8” then if I don’t post. In other words, the most that can be said for climbing atop a digital soap box and posting a rant is that “the ranter’s adamancy breeds more adamancy.”
People who know me well know where I stand politically. Those who agree with my stances are members of the choir, so why preach to them? Those who don’t agree with me are highly unlikely to change their minds because of my rants, no matter how well researched or expressed. By posting my opinions, I simply risk that I myself will become ever more committed to my views and less open to alternative perspectives. If I criticize rigid thinking by others, I must avoid narrow-mindedness myself.
This is not to say I’ve gone gelatinous in my beliefs. On a number of fronts my opinions are as solid as can be, but these tend to involve matters of science based on compelling amounts of peer-reviewed research and matters of politics turning on fundamental principles and a proponderance of irrefutable evidence, not policy questions such as “How do we best mitigate inquities in wealth, education, and access to affordable health care?” or “What can and should government do to mitigate the effects of economic downturns?” My opinions—whether solid or shaky—will guide my vote, over which I have total control. None of my opinions will likely sway another voter with contrary views: over the political opinions of others I have near zero control.
All of which is background for a post (or possibly a series) on “Why I do stuff at which I’ll never be great.”
Stay tuned to this blog . . . and in tune with your own inner coach.
Subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
© 2023 by Eric Nilsson
[1] https://www.npr.org/2023/12/05/1217437167/can-a-social-media-post-change-public-opinion-researchers-weigh-in
