Thoughtful people get challenged frequently. How often have I heard, "Don't overthink that." And, when I talk about something, I so often get blank stares, or even an abrupt change of topic.
Is it me? Or do people just like to skip across the surface of things and resist "getting into it"?
Ah, well, I'm old. Not quite as old as dirt, but getting there!
Sadly --- I see the republican party becoming the party of ignorance.
Not only are they not reading, they are not questioning anything, especially what they believe to be true.
I like to post links and facts on #pos_tefanik's social media. Her supporters attack me, they call me names, they even make threats... but what they don't do, is read the articles I use to support my point.
They don’t post any kind of argument how I could be wrong... mostly because when it comes down they have never read anything that supports what they ‘want to believe.’ Sure they have been told by stiffy or tucker they are right to feel what they want to feel, bu there can not prove they are right (they can prove they are white though).
And sadly some of the articles I post show that in some parts I am wrong, but since they are clueless and don’t read, they never figure that out.
In that sense, maybe I win the argument... but they win the ignorance, and no amount of facts will change them, or force them to read how they are wrong.
I think you have a point regarding Republican national leadership and our own representative, but you always have to be careful in dealing in absolutes. ALL Republicans do not have extreme values. Just as ALL liberals are not extreme. In fact, I believe most Democrats in the region are probably closer to moderates than liberals.
If marjorie taylor green was a democrat, would other democrats call her out on her lies, violent rhetoric and threats of violence?
-----
I believe the democrats would -- Al Franken ended up resigning over a joke picture and accusations from a republican woman.
Paul Gossar post a video of him murdering a co-worker
matt gaetz often makes misogynistic comments
there are more
but I know if any democrat did those things MANY democrats would call them out
I don't recall any republicans calling out gossar or greene and if they did, it was ONLY an indirect 'that wasn't right' after they were asked by reporters
Maybe... but you know that term those o the right started to use, because they wanted to insult democrats' and progressives' choices:
sheeple
Extreme leadership on either side of the aisle, should not be accepted by all of the party and certainly there are some on the fearepublican side who will stand up (Liz Cheney_)... the gop have shown us who the sheeple are..
Several notable folks have switched sides, coming over to the side of reality and thoughtfulness and not-minding-that-I-have-changed-my-mind-cuz-I'm-better-off-now.
Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, Joe Walsh, Nicolle Wallace, Steve Schmidt, and our own Michelle Ostrelich (currently serving in the Schenectady County Legislature) all left the Republican Party. I don't know enough about them to know why they switched.
But I think that among ordinary people -- not writers, not politicians, not notable -- the main reasons for sticking are some combination of the following:
-- They learned their ways of thinking long ago and don't want to admit they were wrong all this time.
-- Their friends/family/both think the same way and if they switched, they'd be left out.
-- They are authoritarians. They look for someone to tell them how to think, and they follow that smart person, that guru, and feel that they are Right (get it?) to stay that loyal course. Think of the notions "Jesus the King." "Onward, Christian Soldiers."
-- They love to argue. It excites them. Even if they didn't convince you, at least they got to have their say and tell you (and anybody listening) what's what. So there!
Jordan Klepper says they stick to their guns (get it?) because their beliefs are tied up with their identity.
I have a little more. I use Twitter, but I never engage with MAGA believers. It's not my job to counter their lies with the truth. Not! Because 1) my tweet won't change their minds. Who am I anyway? I might be a bot! and 2) The way Twitter works, if you engage with those people, you'll get more of their nasty tweets showing up in your timeline.
So, my Twitter feed includes the people I want to listen to. Truthful, thoughtful, reality-based ideas and, in fact, often as not, news. I follow Michael McFaul, Jennifer Rubin, Joe Walsh, Elie Mystal, @MuellerSheWrote, @Victorshi2020, @SenWhitehouse, @mmpadellan, @SergeantAqGo, @ewarren, @JoyceWhiteVance, @davidhogg111. Some are notable, some are little people but they make a lot of noise and I like hearing their affirmations from across many of the social divides we deal with today.
1) You meant William Joseph Walsh? and not the rock guy
Yes to the changes and Walsh I believe is still a republican and gun advocate (though with a common sense view).. But I would contend that often the few that change call attention to the many who do not
I agree with your reasons people don't change.. and Some is related to Cognitive Bias, they (we) search out voices (facts, articles) that say we are right
Love Klepper
===
But 'job to counter their lies' It's not my job either, but it is who I am. I need to point out the facts... I need to say.. you can think what you want, but you can't make up facts... that is lying
I know I probably won't change them, but I don't believe in letting a lie to stand unchecked some people can think it is true. I need to stand up for reality... because I don't want insanity to rule
Hi Ed I believe your confusing Cognitive bias with Confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values
It’s somewhat like this echo chamber or any other chat room. I believe most people tend to seek out others who express similar beliefs or ideals. If you read through the post the majority of posts express similar ideals or points of views and those posts will receive the likes. The posts that did not conform to the majority view don’t get the love.
I think you are right, though I would contend that the definition I just saw for Cognitive Bias is part of it, in that a certain percentage (albeit small) of how one sees things is though present bias and thus they interpret things to their liking..
Though I am not sure how to put it all together for your last two sentences.
I agree that one often seeks out a forum that confirms... and maybe this will be a bias on my part, but when I see left-leaning people discuss an issue here (The Front Page) or on stiffy's facebook page, I feel that if someone is going to have a link to facts.. it will be the left-leaning
Not always.. but I know from experience those that attack my posts with several sources, never have a source themselves or even an understanding of what they are saying (suggesting that if one proves stiffy is taking credit for a democrat bill they are a socialist.. and they are all that more irked that I point that out and they don't understand)
Haha! Not a bad one. It's a little NSFW for a Substack name, but I wanted to stand out somehow. Check out my blog if you like fiction - I did a lot of reading at Crandall back in the day for inspiration!
Earlier last year I printed off a list of banned books and started purchasing them to support the authors. I have to admit after reading them I was shocked. Could not find what was offensive with many despite how I tried to look at it from other perspectives. I also read a book by Jodi Picoult “ Mad Honey.” I wrote to her after finishing the book because I was so touched. As a school administrator I had come into contact with many transgender students and knew the pain they suffered. I thought her book would help people understand the struggles and challenges these children face everyday. It’s important work because sometimes people don’t have the experience of living with specific unique situations ( whether it be gender related, substance abuse, living in another country ripe with violence, etc) but can experience it through books. It helps us to be compassionate. It helps us understand. We rob our children of that and discussions that result from reading about it if our books are not available.
One of my favorite authors -- Ellen Wittlinger --- chooses her topics by what she doesn't know. She has written books about Lesbians, the girl who slept around and other characters who are not like her. She does it to explore and think about what it would be like for those people.
People.
The problem now with those who want to ban books (seemingly always republilcans) is they are people who do not mind ignorance.
Almost every racist can say, they don't have a black friend. The only people they know are those like them.
And sadly, they have not read a book that addresses a topic they don't understand because
They have embraced ignorance.
And lost the joy of knowing people, not to mention a good story (book).
After I read the article, I wrote a letter to the principal of my daughters' high school thanking them for requiring 4 years of history, since it seems like it is something they'll never revisit after. The other thing I liked about my daughters' school, there was a required "current events" session each week, where they took turns picking a topic in the news, reading three articles about it, and critiquing each, saying which assertions in them were "fact", which were "opinion". A useful exercise for all of us. I remember one of the topics my younger daughter picked was the murder of Jamal Khasshoggi.
My interest in current affairs has led to discovering some wonderful historians like Heather Cox Richardson, Tim Snyder, TCinLA (Thomas McKelvey Cleaver), and Anne Applebaum.
The current crop of historians often writes about recent history -- times I lived through. Their researched, nuanced perspectives enhance my understanding of the world.
My daughter and I watched the movie, Are You There God, It’s Me Margaret in Tupper Lake last weekend and loved it. Besides the issues of puberty, it also touched upon Margaret’s perceptions about religion and relationships ( friendships and hurtful exclusions). I wished the book had been available when I was in junior high school as it would have alleviated anxieties over issues I thought only happened to me in my still egocentric world!
Now, a love note to libraries, they are the anchors of our communities where people can lose themselves surrounded by so many exciting possibilities that face them, books to spirit them away to exotic places, to learn a new skill, to discover and dream, to solve problems, socialize and muse with friends. I have my mother to thank for instilling the love of libraries. Despite leaving school in 8 th grade back in the 40s for a horrific family life , moving out and staying at a boarding house near her place of work, she wanted to ensure her children one day would be educated and the best way she knew how was to pack us up in the old Buick and drive us to a place we loved, the Hepburn Library in
Waddington,NY. every two weeks on a Saturday. Where else could one go for checking out stacks of books and building a secure sense of self and space than a library?
As a retired educator, the very idea that groups of overly concerned mothers ( Moms for Liberty) are waging vendettas against certain books in school and public libraries across the country is frightening. They are choosing what children are allowed to read, clamping down on librarians and their skilled training in selecting classic, timely or current books for various interests of students, and identifying many books as porn due to language, gender issues, racial issues etc. . As parents they have a right to control what books their children can be exposed to, but to endorse this banning of books for all students reminds one of actions the Nazis exhibited during WW 2 with banning and burning of books. The name Moms for Liberty is a misnomer. We must not allow the dumbing down of literature opportunities for our children who need to experience all sorts of books used in schools across the country. I grew up reading many books that are currently banned and used wonderful books with my students throughout the years to engage, boost critical thinking skills, develop a sense of justice ,wonder, a desire to learn more about a topic and now some of those very books are endangered.
It should be pointed out. Most libraries and/or librarians have a banned book policy.
Usually called a 'book challenge policy' (or word to that effect). And there is often a form that is to be filled out by the person who is making the challenge.
The fact that there is a form often stops the challenge, they next big hurdle is the first question:
"Have you read the book?"
The reason why it stops a lot of challenges is because they have not read the book, and it makes the next question really really hard to answer: "Why should this book be pulled from the shelf? What part did you find problematic?"
It is hard to answer that first question if 'no' was the answer to the first part.
What also becomes amazingly difficult in this process for the challenger is the librarian.
Libraries don't buy books because there are dirty words or salacious scenes in it. Nor do they buy a book to force an ideology onto a child.
Oddly enough, they buy books after they read a review of the book; or because a patron has asked for that book or that kind of book.
And when a librarian buys a book that wasn't asked for, it was because they know the demographics of their patrons. If you go into a library and you see a really big detective fiction section.. it isn't because the librarian is Columbo, it is because people who frequent that library READ A LOT OF DETECTIVE FICTION.
Believe it or not... librarians don't have enough money to buy books just to make right-wingers mad... but the do have enough to have books in the stacks that would appeal to them... if they were so inclined to read.
“It is very nearly impossible to become an educated person in a country so distrustful of the independent mind.” ― James Baldwin
Thoughtful people get challenged frequently. How often have I heard, "Don't overthink that." And, when I talk about something, I so often get blank stares, or even an abrupt change of topic.
Is it me? Or do people just like to skip across the surface of things and resist "getting into it"?
Ah, well, I'm old. Not quite as old as dirt, but getting there!
Sadly --- I see the republican party becoming the party of ignorance.
Not only are they not reading, they are not questioning anything, especially what they believe to be true.
I like to post links and facts on #pos_tefanik's social media. Her supporters attack me, they call me names, they even make threats... but what they don't do, is read the articles I use to support my point.
They don’t post any kind of argument how I could be wrong... mostly because when it comes down they have never read anything that supports what they ‘want to believe.’ Sure they have been told by stiffy or tucker they are right to feel what they want to feel, bu there can not prove they are right (they can prove they are white though).
And sadly some of the articles I post show that in some parts I am wrong, but since they are clueless and don’t read, they never figure that out.
In that sense, maybe I win the argument... but they win the ignorance, and no amount of facts will change them, or force them to read how they are wrong.
I think you have a point regarding Republican national leadership and our own representative, but you always have to be careful in dealing in absolutes. ALL Republicans do not have extreme values. Just as ALL liberals are not extreme. In fact, I believe most Democrats in the region are probably closer to moderates than liberals.
I can agree with you in theory
but in reality I have to throw some shade.
I can do it with one question:
If marjorie taylor green was a democrat, would other democrats call her out on her lies, violent rhetoric and threats of violence?
-----
I believe the democrats would -- Al Franken ended up resigning over a joke picture and accusations from a republican woman.
Paul Gossar post a video of him murdering a co-worker
matt gaetz often makes misogynistic comments
there are more
but I know if any democrat did those things MANY democrats would call them out
I don't recall any republicans calling out gossar or greene and if they did, it was ONLY an indirect 'that wasn't right' after they were asked by reporters
But is that because of extreme GOP leadership?
Maybe... but you know that term those o the right started to use, because they wanted to insult democrats' and progressives' choices:
sheeple
Extreme leadership on either side of the aisle, should not be accepted by all of the party and certainly there are some on the fearepublican side who will stand up (Liz Cheney_)... the gop have shown us who the sheeple are..
Several notable folks have switched sides, coming over to the side of reality and thoughtfulness and not-minding-that-I-have-changed-my-mind-cuz-I'm-better-off-now.
Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, Joe Walsh, Nicolle Wallace, Steve Schmidt, and our own Michelle Ostrelich (currently serving in the Schenectady County Legislature) all left the Republican Party. I don't know enough about them to know why they switched.
But I think that among ordinary people -- not writers, not politicians, not notable -- the main reasons for sticking are some combination of the following:
-- They learned their ways of thinking long ago and don't want to admit they were wrong all this time.
-- Their friends/family/both think the same way and if they switched, they'd be left out.
-- They are authoritarians. They look for someone to tell them how to think, and they follow that smart person, that guru, and feel that they are Right (get it?) to stay that loyal course. Think of the notions "Jesus the King." "Onward, Christian Soldiers."
-- They love to argue. It excites them. Even if they didn't convince you, at least they got to have their say and tell you (and anybody listening) what's what. So there!
Jordan Klepper says they stick to their guns (get it?) because their beliefs are tied up with their identity.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jordan-klepper-memorable-maga-exchange_n_64463ff1e4b011a819c262fb
I have a little more. I use Twitter, but I never engage with MAGA believers. It's not my job to counter their lies with the truth. Not! Because 1) my tweet won't change their minds. Who am I anyway? I might be a bot! and 2) The way Twitter works, if you engage with those people, you'll get more of their nasty tweets showing up in your timeline.
So, my Twitter feed includes the people I want to listen to. Truthful, thoughtful, reality-based ideas and, in fact, often as not, news. I follow Michael McFaul, Jennifer Rubin, Joe Walsh, Elie Mystal, @MuellerSheWrote, @Victorshi2020, @SenWhitehouse, @mmpadellan, @SergeantAqGo, @ewarren, @JoyceWhiteVance, @davidhogg111. Some are notable, some are little people but they make a lot of noise and I like hearing their affirmations from across many of the social divides we deal with today.
1) You meant William Joseph Walsh? and not the rock guy
Yes to the changes and Walsh I believe is still a republican and gun advocate (though with a common sense view).. But I would contend that often the few that change call attention to the many who do not
I agree with your reasons people don't change.. and Some is related to Cognitive Bias, they (we) search out voices (facts, articles) that say we are right
Love Klepper
===
But 'job to counter their lies' It's not my job either, but it is who I am. I need to point out the facts... I need to say.. you can think what you want, but you can't make up facts... that is lying
I know I probably won't change them, but I don't believe in letting a lie to stand unchecked some people can think it is true. I need to stand up for reality... because I don't want insanity to rule
Love Klepper too! He has guts going into MAGA world.
Yes... and in an indirect tangen
I read the Jan6 committee report you suggested and the thing I found the most frightening... and I found almost all of it terrifying
Was how trump and republicans would put out private information about people they didn't like -- like phone numbers and address...
and then the (often sexualized) death threats to people and families.
To me that was enough reason to lock trump up for life and throw away the key
Hi Ed I believe your confusing Cognitive bias with Confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values
It’s somewhat like this echo chamber or any other chat room. I believe most people tend to seek out others who express similar beliefs or ideals. If you read through the post the majority of posts express similar ideals or points of views and those posts will receive the likes. The posts that did not conform to the majority view don’t get the love.
I think you are right, though I would contend that the definition I just saw for Cognitive Bias is part of it, in that a certain percentage (albeit small) of how one sees things is though present bias and thus they interpret things to their liking..
Though I am not sure how to put it all together for your last two sentences.
I agree that one often seeks out a forum that confirms... and maybe this will be a bias on my part, but when I see left-leaning people discuss an issue here (The Front Page) or on stiffy's facebook page, I feel that if someone is going to have a link to facts.. it will be the left-leaning
Not always.. but I know from experience those that attack my posts with several sources, never have a source themselves or even an understanding of what they are saying (suggesting that if one proves stiffy is taking credit for a democrat bill they are a socialist.. and they are all that more irked that I point that out and they don't understand)
thanks
Thinking about something seriously, weighing both sides of an issue is hard work and often does not confirm what you originally thought.
Crandall Library is wonderful. Kathy Naftaly knows our community and understands what's happening in the world today.
Good article!
The Crandall Library is one of my favorite places in the world. I'm glad they know they're paragons of the community, and seem to be acting like it.
I never heard of a porn name before,. So cool. Mine would be Danny Watkins.
Haha! Not a bad one. It's a little NSFW for a Substack name, but I wanted to stand out somehow. Check out my blog if you like fiction - I did a lot of reading at Crandall back in the day for inspiration!
Earlier last year I printed off a list of banned books and started purchasing them to support the authors. I have to admit after reading them I was shocked. Could not find what was offensive with many despite how I tried to look at it from other perspectives. I also read a book by Jodi Picoult “ Mad Honey.” I wrote to her after finishing the book because I was so touched. As a school administrator I had come into contact with many transgender students and knew the pain they suffered. I thought her book would help people understand the struggles and challenges these children face everyday. It’s important work because sometimes people don’t have the experience of living with specific unique situations ( whether it be gender related, substance abuse, living in another country ripe with violence, etc) but can experience it through books. It helps us to be compassionate. It helps us understand. We rob our children of that and discussions that result from reading about it if our books are not available.
One of my favorite authors -- Ellen Wittlinger --- chooses her topics by what she doesn't know. She has written books about Lesbians, the girl who slept around and other characters who are not like her. She does it to explore and think about what it would be like for those people.
People.
The problem now with those who want to ban books (seemingly always republilcans) is they are people who do not mind ignorance.
Almost every racist can say, they don't have a black friend. The only people they know are those like them.
And sadly, they have not read a book that addresses a topic they don't understand because
They have embraced ignorance.
And lost the joy of knowing people, not to mention a good story (book).
The second amendment is SO MUCH more important than the first after all….
without a weapon, how else would one defend their right to be ignorant ;-)
I read an article a few years ago on the decline in the study of history in college. The exception are the elite colleges- where there was an increase. https://www.thedailybeast.com/history-majors-are-becoming-a-thing-of-the-past-except-in-the-ivy-league
After I read the article, I wrote a letter to the principal of my daughters' high school thanking them for requiring 4 years of history, since it seems like it is something they'll never revisit after. The other thing I liked about my daughters' school, there was a required "current events" session each week, where they took turns picking a topic in the news, reading three articles about it, and critiquing each, saying which assertions in them were "fact", which were "opinion". A useful exercise for all of us. I remember one of the topics my younger daughter picked was the murder of Jamal Khasshoggi.
Thank you for reporting this personal history.
My interest in current affairs has led to discovering some wonderful historians like Heather Cox Richardson, Tim Snyder, TCinLA (Thomas McKelvey Cleaver), and Anne Applebaum.
The current crop of historians often writes about recent history -- times I lived through. Their researched, nuanced perspectives enhance my understanding of the world.
One doesn't have to be a history major, to want to understand the world
We have all heard:
those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it
///// George Santayana, and in its original form it read, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
https://bigthink.com/culture-religion/those-who-do-not-learn-history-doomed-to-repeat-it-really/ \\\\\
I would contend: those who do not know history are condemn to ignorance of the world they live in.
We need to start asking questions of those who want to ban books.
The number one question:
What are the last 10 books you have read?
Unfortunately, the people doing this... are making unqualified decisions. And, seemingly, pushing their ignorance onto others
My daughter and I watched the movie, Are You There God, It’s Me Margaret in Tupper Lake last weekend and loved it. Besides the issues of puberty, it also touched upon Margaret’s perceptions about religion and relationships ( friendships and hurtful exclusions). I wished the book had been available when I was in junior high school as it would have alleviated anxieties over issues I thought only happened to me in my still egocentric world!
Now, a love note to libraries, they are the anchors of our communities where people can lose themselves surrounded by so many exciting possibilities that face them, books to spirit them away to exotic places, to learn a new skill, to discover and dream, to solve problems, socialize and muse with friends. I have my mother to thank for instilling the love of libraries. Despite leaving school in 8 th grade back in the 40s for a horrific family life , moving out and staying at a boarding house near her place of work, she wanted to ensure her children one day would be educated and the best way she knew how was to pack us up in the old Buick and drive us to a place we loved, the Hepburn Library in
Waddington,NY. every two weeks on a Saturday. Where else could one go for checking out stacks of books and building a secure sense of self and space than a library?
As a retired educator, the very idea that groups of overly concerned mothers ( Moms for Liberty) are waging vendettas against certain books in school and public libraries across the country is frightening. They are choosing what children are allowed to read, clamping down on librarians and their skilled training in selecting classic, timely or current books for various interests of students, and identifying many books as porn due to language, gender issues, racial issues etc. . As parents they have a right to control what books their children can be exposed to, but to endorse this banning of books for all students reminds one of actions the Nazis exhibited during WW 2 with banning and burning of books. The name Moms for Liberty is a misnomer. We must not allow the dumbing down of literature opportunities for our children who need to experience all sorts of books used in schools across the country. I grew up reading many books that are currently banned and used wonderful books with my students throughout the years to engage, boost critical thinking skills, develop a sense of justice ,wonder, a desire to learn more about a topic and now some of those very books are endangered.
I was one of three men in audience at mall. I loved it too.
I would like to make a generalization (And, yes Ken, it should be an absolute)
when it comes to banning books it is usually republicans
when it comes to reading books, it always seems to be democrats
when it comes to parents rights
Democrats say parents should choose what is right for their children
Republicans say parents should choose what is right for all children
when it comes to the first amendment
republicans 'say' they believe in it... in theory
democrats show they believe in it in practice
Some great lines here!
I try.. I use my comments here to create my own essays
thanks
It should be pointed out. Most libraries and/or librarians have a banned book policy.
Usually called a 'book challenge policy' (or word to that effect). And there is often a form that is to be filled out by the person who is making the challenge.
The fact that there is a form often stops the challenge, they next big hurdle is the first question:
"Have you read the book?"
The reason why it stops a lot of challenges is because they have not read the book, and it makes the next question really really hard to answer: "Why should this book be pulled from the shelf? What part did you find problematic?"
It is hard to answer that first question if 'no' was the answer to the first part.
What also becomes amazingly difficult in this process for the challenger is the librarian.
Libraries don't buy books because there are dirty words or salacious scenes in it. Nor do they buy a book to force an ideology onto a child.
Oddly enough, they buy books after they read a review of the book; or because a patron has asked for that book or that kind of book.
And when a librarian buys a book that wasn't asked for, it was because they know the demographics of their patrons. If you go into a library and you see a really big detective fiction section.. it isn't because the librarian is Columbo, it is because people who frequent that library READ A LOT OF DETECTIVE FICTION.
Believe it or not... librarians don't have enough money to buy books just to make right-wingers mad... but the do have enough to have books in the stacks that would appeal to them... if they were so inclined to read.
And when you try to ban a book, you are really trying to ban ideas
and why would you ban ideas, unless you are afraid