POLITICS WILL NOT BE DISCUSSED
The uncomfortable feeling of a forced American taboo holding us back as a nation
I wrote a quick verse related to a family meeting soon to come. My sister told me a pact was made that politics would not be discussed. All I can think is that family members have become so radicalized in the age of Trump which requires to have ground rules in which to meet. Not that politics should be a main topic of any family gathering for conversation, but to be at the point that it can’t be discussed in any way is entirely dysfunctional for a country and a very sad state of affairs. Here is my verse, passive aggressively written perhaps to state my opinion on this whole dilemma. Here is my verse.
I searched Truth Social with ‘family politics’ to search for any sign of concern about family and politics associated with my topic today but could only find one vague reference. Seems perhaps a segment of the population have no concerns in this problem.
A quick search of ‘family politics’ on X yielded several posts related to my verse. Here it is.
I found a writing with recommendations on discussion of politics with family members. This addresses my general theme. Here are some excerpts from it.
When Families Disagree About Politics
By *Susan Adcox
@grandparent
Updated on May 26, 2022
When to Avoid Political Topics
For better or worse, political decisions have a tremendous impact on our lives. That alone makes them worthy of discussion. A world in which we never discuss politics for fear of hurting someone's feelings would be a dysfunctional world indeed.
But when it's obvious that two opposing sides will never meet, it's time to declare a moratorium on political discussion. In these cases, turn to issues of common interest for a more productive and enjoyable conversation.
When Disagreements Signal Bigger Problems
There may be instances when a difference of opinion on political matters is symptomatic of larger problems. The values and morals that form the basis of our lives can also greatly influence our political views.
If you feel that a family member's stance on certain issues points to a fundamental difference in their value system, it could be time to reevaluate your relationship with that person. You will need to decide if you want to address the bigger issues underlying their political beliefs, or if you have seen enough to make an informed decision about whether to continue the relationship.
This doesn't have to mean total estrangement or open conflict every time you see that person. But it may mean that you choose to spend less time around them.
How to Handle Family Gatherings
Holidays can be an especially tense time for some families, and family gatherings are often ripe for conflict. To begin with, they involve a lot of planning and hard work, and that puts some people on edge. Being together can also trigger old wounds and family tensions.
Generally speaking, political discussions don't make good mealtime conversations. Besides the obvious risk of conflict, some guests may not find a heated political debate enjoyable. These arguments tend to be dominated by one or two people, and that's not much fun for the others.
The combination of food and political conversation can be immensely enjoyable if and when everyone shares similar beliefs or can enjoy a spirited debate without taking it personally. Unfortunately, that's not always the case.
Never assume you know the political leanings of another family member. It might surprise you to learn they are the exact opposite of what you suspected.
* Highlights
Susan Adcox is a former English and journalism teacher with seven grandchildren
Author of the book Stories From My Grandparent: An Heirloom Journal for Your Grandchild
Experience
Susan Adcox is a former writer for Verywell Family, covering grandparenting. Frequently consulted as an authority on grandparenting, she is the author of the book Stories From My Grandparent: An Heirloom Journal for Your Grandchild. Her grandparenting expertise has appeared in numerous publications.
From Pew research.
BY LAURA SILVER AND PATRICK VAN KESSEL
@lauraruthsilver @pvankessel
In the United States, even the meaning of life can have a partisan tinge.
In February 2021, Pew Research Center asked 2,596 U.S. adults the following open-ended question: “What about your life do you currently find meaningful, fulfilling or satisfying? What keeps you going and why?” Researchers then evaluated the answers and grouped them into the most commonly mentioned categories.
Both Republicans and Democrats are most likely to say they derive meaning from their families, and they also commonly mention their friends, careers and material well-being. But Republicans and Democrats differ substantially over several other factors, including faith, freedom, health and hobbies.
a) Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to cite religion as a source of meaning in their life. b) Republicans are more likely than Democrats (12% vs. 6%) to bring up freedom and independence as something that gives their life meaning. c) Democrats are more likely than Republicans to cite physical and mental health as part of what gives them meaning in life – and they mention the COVID-19 pandemic more frequently. d) Democrats are more likely than Republicans to find meaning in hobbies and recreation, nature and the outdoors, and pets – though small shares of Americans overall mention these things. e) Conservative Republicans are particularly likely to mention their country or where they live as a source of meaning. f) Partisanship is associated with Americans’ views about the meaning of life more than it is in other parts of the world. g) Though few mention government leaders when discussing the meaning of life, Americans are more likely to do so than people in other countries.
Some quotes related to my theme. Please read them and determine if they are truly associated with the topic at hand.
“As the scale of the balance must give way to the weight that presses it down, so the mind must of necessity yield to demonstration.”
— Cicero.
Marcus Tullius Cicero (3 January 106 BC – 7 December 43 BC) was a Roman statesman, lawyer, scholar, philosopher, writer and Academic skeptic, who tried to uphold optimate principles during the political crises that led to the establishment of the Roman Empire. His extensive writings include treatises on rhetoric, philosophy and politics. He is considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists and the innovator of what became known as "Ciceronian rhetoric". Cicero was educated in Rome and in Greece. He came from a wealthy municipal family of the Roman equestrian order, and served as consul in 63 BC.
“They that are more frequent to dispute be not always the best able to determine.”
— Hooker.
Richard Hooker (25 March 1554 – 2 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian. He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century. His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth-century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition. Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.
“Fanaticism is the child of false zeal and of superstition, the father of intolerance and of persecution.”
— J. W. Fletcher.
John William Fletcher (12 September 1729 – 14 August 1785) was a Swiss-born English divine and Methodist leader. Of French Huguenot stock, he was born in Nyon in Vaud, Switzerland. Fletcher emigrated to England in 1750 and there he became an Anglican vicar. He began to work with John Wesley, becoming a key interpreter of Wesleyan theology in the 18th century and one of Methodism's first great theologians. Fletcher was renowned in Britain for his piety and generosity; when asked if he had any needs, he responded, "...I want nothing but more grace." Fletcher's writings, while serious in nature, display his keen wit, sometimes demonstrated by the use of clever satire.
“Earnestness is good; it means business. But fanaticism overdoes, and is consequently reactionary.”
— Spurgeon.
Charles Haddon Spurgeon (19 June 1834 – 31 January 1892) was an English Particular Baptist preacher. Spurgeon strongly opposed the owning of slaves. He lost support from the Southern Baptists, sales of his sermons dropped, and he received scores of threatening and insulting letters as a consequence. “I do from my inmost soul detest slavery… and although I commune at the Lord's table with men of all creeds, yet with a slave-holder I have no fellowship of any sort or kind. Whenever [a slave-holder] has called upon me, I have considered it my duty to express my detestation of his wickedness, and I would as soon think of receiving a murderer into my church… as a man stealer.”
“In politics, it is almost a commonplace, that a party of order or stability, and a party of progress or reform, are both necessary elements of a healthy state of political life.”
— J. Stuart Mill.
John Stuart Mill (20 May 1806 – 7 May 1873) was an English philosopher, political economist, politician and civil servant. One of the most influential thinkers in the history of classical liberalism, he contributed widely to social theory, political theory, and political economy. Dubbed "the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century" by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, he conceived of liberty as justifying the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state and social control. Mill states the Principle of Liberty as: "the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection". "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant."
“Life cannot subsist in society but by reciprocal concessions.”
— Johnson.
Samuel Johnson (18 September 1709 – 13 December 1784), often called Dr Johnson, was an English writer who made lasting contributions as a poet, playwright, essayist, moralist, literary critic, sermonist, biographer, editor, and lexicographer. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography calls him "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history". In his later life Johnson became a celebrity, and following his death he was increasingly seen to have had a lasting effect on literary criticism, even being claimed to be the one truly great critic of English literature. A prevailing mode of literary theory in the 20th century drew from his views, and he had a lasting impact on biography. Johnson's Dictionary had far-reaching effects on Modern English.
This is what I have for today, such as it is. Anecdotally I have talked to many people with similar political chasms within their family. The result of this being widespread, which it apparently is, is very damaging to the country in my estimation. I’m not exactly sure if I’ve given any answers to it, but perhaps calling continual attention to it can eventually be beneficial.
87th posting, September 7, 2023