For several years, my wife and I used to spend most of the winter renting a house in the Villages in central Florida, near Ocala. As you may know, The Villages is a highly developed retirement community having more activities for old-timers than is really necessary (I recall there was a BB-Gun Club) and I joined the Philosophy Club primarily to meet people with similar interests. I befriended a member, let’s call him Joe, who was of the conservative persuasion and me, being of liberal persuasion led to many interesting and amicable conversations. I remember one, in particular where I cited an article from the Associated Press because it seemed to me unbiased. He disagreed, saying their choice of words describing an event was biased to the left citing their stylebook which he claimed encouraged their journalists to use the word “protests”, or “mostly peaceful protests'' instead of the word “riots” when in fact there was clearly violence and sometimes looting. That got me to thinking about the news sources I read because I trusted them.
Currently I read the Press Republican (of course) as well as the left-leaning New York Times, The Washington Post, the Atlantic and the New Yorker magazine. The not-left sources I look at are Fox News --- while most of their not-left opinionators are a bit too much for me, their newsroom is actually, I think, pretty balanced. And Fair. I thought that Chris Wallace tried his level best to be fair and balanced as the second Presidential debate moderator. Other not left-leaning ources that I read regularly include the Wall Street Journal and the Economist. And thus I consider myself a Moderate (although I have to admit to drinking too much wine at weddings).
Returning to the question raised in the title of this column, obviously the answer is: Yes, partly. The Internet is at least partly responsible for the current political divide simply because makes it relatively easy for folks to get their news from the far left or the far right but it also makes it very easy to spread this news with a little bit of personal bias sprinkled in. Before the advent of the Internet, we got most of ou news from newspapers and TV but in order to share that news with friends and family we could use the telephone and rack up long-distance chartres or clip articles from the newspaper, putting them into an envelope, addressing them then placing a stamp on the envelope and getting it to the Post Office for delivery.
Then, if the stars were correctly aligned, the intended recipient would get delivery in three days or so. If the recipient wished, the same process could be reversed and a conversation would ensue. So how is that different from posting an email or visiting a social media site where differing opinions abound? The short answer is “reaction time”. If the recipient gets the facts on the Internet and they violently disagree, they can respond vitriolically at almost the speed of light, perhaps not stopping to consider how the original sender might react.
With face-to-face conversation, each participant can actually see and feel the reaction of one's speech and adjust accordingly. Even responding by snail mail is better because it takes more time to write a letter --- time that one could have used to cool off. As a matter of fact, psychologists recommend writing that nasty letter then immediately discarding it as a way to blow off steam. This extra time gives one the opportunity to cool off and proceed with a clearer head and certainly more civility.
Email extends the contemplation time a bit more but social sites like Facebook and Twitter and sites that present the news and allow responses do not afford the opportunity to cool down This can lead to a situation called “flaming” which as its name implies just fans the flames of disagreement. TV by itself does not allow a two-way conversation to take place; the best we can do is write a letter to the Editor of the local newspaper or the TV corporation itself and wait patiently for a reply.
The upshot is that since the invention of the printing press and newspapers we have had a relatively safe way to express our rage. Face-to-face expression is usually more civil being limited by fear of getting punched in the nose. The Internet has made it very easy for extremists on the left and the right to create protests which are much larger than the old days. And the more people you have at a protest or a counter-protest, the higher the chances of riot, even insurrection occurring. There is an interesting article in the New York Times 1/24/21 edition, “Capitol Riot Puts Spotlight on ‘Apocalyptically Minded’ Global Far Right” which describes how easily neo-nazi and white supremicist groups in Europe and the US communicate and cooperate. More insidiously, many of these hate groups allow you to join in their conversations even if you are not a member --- this makes it very difficult for law enforcement and investigative reporters to track or even estimate the size of these abominable spreaders of hate and disinformation. Speech that incites imminent lawless action is not protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution (Wikipedia)
We have reached the point where we are talking past one another and many have given up because they believe that any attempt to communicate is just a waste of time. If we continue to consider communication and compromise as impossible, both sides will lose.
Underlying the failure to converse is the lack of trust. Within our limbic brain we are still members of a clan or a tribe and we instinctively trust those in our tribe and are wary of those outside of it. This wariness is the cause of our distrust. On the other hand, it has been a useful survival strategy for our species. When confronted by something bigger with horns or that doesn’t smell right we need to make a decision fast, without the luxury of thinking about it. But this country’s division will not be healed by hasty decisions. What we need at this time are wise and intelligent leaders --- leaders who will appeal to our better angels.
My hope is that President Biden’s promise to “represent all of the people and not just those who voted for him” is realized.
May God bless Joe Biden and God bless America.
