> "No particular individual knows what is best for humanity but by listening to each other and thinking things through critically we can reach the best understanding of the present and make wise decisions for the future."
I absolutely agree with this, but herein lies the problem. I'm not taking the side of ban advocates, please don't misunderstand me. I am on the side of human decency in agreement with these protests. I just want to present the other side of the argument for consideration. Beware, this is not a popular opinion right now.
Many on the right have been sounding off on social with statements like the following:
Why do the left stand with Muslims that are from countries where everything they hold dear is oppressed. In some countries, stoning and beheading is still a valid outcome for many infractions. Why are they so quick to overlook the gaping issues in Islamic culture in various countries when they cannot even overlook white Christian males who aren't stoning or beheading citizens for their religious beliefs in the U.S.?
The statement from the article is that listening to one another is how we can reach the best understanding, but many on the right feel that identity politics have been used against them. Why should they come back to the table when one side isn't willing to listen? They feel that when it comes to the left, they preach tolerance, but rarely if ever can actually practice it themselves.
Like I said, the above aren't my opinions, but counterarguments that I see from those around me. I'm not saying they are quality arguments either, just that the above are what I see.
That said, what do I think? In my opinion this is Trump's strategy at work. He always opens with an extreme because it gives him room to work back to the middle while making the opposition feel like he's compromising. If my assessment is correct, he is going to ask Congress to propose a solution to this, and then negotiate back towards the middle. He's a business man, this of course makes sense to me from a purely observational standpoint.
I personally feel his gamble is too risky. His gamble is going to end up costing people their lives. This is America, we don't turn our backs on the downtrodden. We show up and welcome them in. We take the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. I now deeply feel like the great experiment is over. On January 27th we became just like every other country in the world. We aren't exceptional anymore and we caved to fear of the unknown. Mark my words, we are seeing the baby steps of our first internal revolution.
> This is America, we don't turn our backs on the downtrodden
Well to be fair for most of history this wasn't true if you judge the nation by its actions and not its words. The statue of liberty was standing at a time when America was very intent on denying immigration by "unfavorable groups": https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-jewish-irish-asian-italian...
I think it's been finally true after WW2 till about now though.
I agree with your overall sentiments though, especially with the idea that the radical left created the alt right today. Same tactics, equally as annoying and far more dangerous.
Humans can intellectualize anything which is why we end up in some very dark places. That's why it's important to listen to many voices and avoid certainty.
I'm not muslim but I'm probably not far down on the list of groups that Trump might take action against in the next 4 years. I'm not fearful for my livelihood today, but I'm extremely wary. Trump himself hasn't really taken a strong stance on this but some in his party seem to think it wasn't a bad idea: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/1...
These days I feel like we're all ants following pheromone trails, and individually powerless against the emergent phenomenon of a new yet familiar social movement.
4 comments
[ 2.1 ms ] story [ 12.3 ms ] threadI absolutely agree with this, but herein lies the problem. I'm not taking the side of ban advocates, please don't misunderstand me. I am on the side of human decency in agreement with these protests. I just want to present the other side of the argument for consideration. Beware, this is not a popular opinion right now.
Many on the right have been sounding off on social with statements like the following:
Why do the left stand with Muslims that are from countries where everything they hold dear is oppressed. In some countries, stoning and beheading is still a valid outcome for many infractions. Why are they so quick to overlook the gaping issues in Islamic culture in various countries when they cannot even overlook white Christian males who aren't stoning or beheading citizens for their religious beliefs in the U.S.?
The statement from the article is that listening to one another is how we can reach the best understanding, but many on the right feel that identity politics have been used against them. Why should they come back to the table when one side isn't willing to listen? They feel that when it comes to the left, they preach tolerance, but rarely if ever can actually practice it themselves.
Like I said, the above aren't my opinions, but counterarguments that I see from those around me. I'm not saying they are quality arguments either, just that the above are what I see.
That said, what do I think? In my opinion this is Trump's strategy at work. He always opens with an extreme because it gives him room to work back to the middle while making the opposition feel like he's compromising. If my assessment is correct, he is going to ask Congress to propose a solution to this, and then negotiate back towards the middle. He's a business man, this of course makes sense to me from a purely observational standpoint.
I personally feel his gamble is too risky. His gamble is going to end up costing people their lives. This is America, we don't turn our backs on the downtrodden. We show up and welcome them in. We take the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. I now deeply feel like the great experiment is over. On January 27th we became just like every other country in the world. We aren't exceptional anymore and we caved to fear of the unknown. Mark my words, we are seeing the baby steps of our first internal revolution.
Well to be fair for most of history this wasn't true if you judge the nation by its actions and not its words. The statue of liberty was standing at a time when America was very intent on denying immigration by "unfavorable groups": https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-jewish-irish-asian-italian...
I think it's been finally true after WW2 till about now though.
I agree with your overall sentiments though, especially with the idea that the radical left created the alt right today. Same tactics, equally as annoying and far more dangerous.
I'm not muslim but I'm probably not far down on the list of groups that Trump might take action against in the next 4 years. I'm not fearful for my livelihood today, but I'm extremely wary. Trump himself hasn't really taken a strong stance on this but some in his party seem to think it wasn't a bad idea: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/1...
These days I feel like we're all ants following pheromone trails, and individually powerless against the emergent phenomenon of a new yet familiar social movement.