Fundamental Values

By -

Don't let politics ruin good things. 

With the Presidential election just two weeks away, this is especially salient advice. 

Over the years, I've lost many friends due to ideological differences. Many of my right-of-center friends have also encountered this. 

I refuse, however, to give into toxic polarization; if we let trivial political differences fracture good relationships, we will, ultimately, come apart as a country. 

Remember: we have, in some capacity, always been politically pluralistic. The Jeffersonians and the Hamiltonians; Whigs and Democrats; Democrats and Republicans; libertarian-oriented Republicans and their paleo-conservative counterparts. I can go on and on... 

One's own politics - which, if you are anything like me, are constantly evolving - should be of little import. There is only one thing that we should take into consideration when it comes to relationships: fundamental values. 

Earlier today, I read a beautiful piece by David Spereall in BBC.  He tells the story of a group of Englishmen who, since 1968, have been meeting for pints every Thursday. That's 56 years of regular meet-ups! Can you imagine that?

Even during COVID, the group continued their tradition via Zoom. 

But, what about the political make-up of this group? Are they ideologically monolithic?

"Everybody is different, " one of the ole blokes remarked. "We have incredibly contrasting political views, which leads to the most incredible, illogical arguments."

So, that should be it, right? A politically diverse group could never possibly endure in the long-run! Well, according to Brian, "We are quite different people but I suspect we’ve all got the same fundamental values." Huh... Could this be?? "If we argue with each other, it’s not about critical things."

What do ya know, it looks like people, whether they be Labour, Conservative, Democrat, or Republican, can actually get along just fine. 

But, this begs the question: what are these fundamental values that trump political trivialities? Well, I can give you my answer: respect for animals, the surrounding community, and me. That's it. If someone holds doors for others, tips their waiters and baristas, refrains from any sort of littering, and cares for God's creatures, that's all that matters to me. Their views on immigration or economic policy, on the other hand, are utterly meaningless, albeit potentially interesting.

Speaking of political depolarization, I was actually profiled by photojournalist Paola Chapdelaine in the Guardian last week. See here. She did an awesome job. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Examining Social Connectedness Abroad

By -
Image
  Non-Western countries are known to be more collectivistic and group-oriented, especially when compared to Western countries like Great Britain and America.  Lawrence Mead, my former professor and thesis supervisor at NYU, articulated this cultural difference in his 2019 book, Burdens of Freedom: Cultural Difference and American Power: ...Western culture is individualist, while non-Western cultures tend to be conformist. Westerners take action largely to fulfill personal goals and values, if necessary, changing the world to do so. In this sense, they live their lives from the inside out. In the non-West, by contrast, most people take their cues largely from without - from their immediate associates, higher authority, or tradition. They adjust to their environment much more than they seek to change it. They live their lives largely from the outside in.  Professor Mead is easily the most valiant and intellectually honest professor that I ever had the honor of taking. He received an enor
Read more

It's Embarrassing To Admit This...

By -
Image
  It's embarrassing to admit this, but... I really only started reading about two years ago. Before that, reading was the most mundane, yawn-inducing task I could think of. It wasn't fun or energizing; it was dull and torturous.  When I was in high school, I wasn't particularly scholarly, to put it mildly. While I did well, I didn't excel. Most, though not all, of what I read was required for my various classes. Though, now that I think about it, there were various poetry books and short stories I enjoyed. Lawrence Ferlinghetti's,  A Coney Island of the Mind;  Philip Schultz's,  Failure;  and Nikolai Gogol's,  Diary of a Madman  come to mind. I also enjoyed the dystopian works of Paul Auster.  Barring these few, but notable, exceptions, I did not read. This, in turn, effected my diction, and still does to a degree. I recall one particularly embarrassing moment in a mathematics class I took freshman year. On the first day of class - which is, of course, a pri
Read more

Comments Open to All

By -
Frank Filocomo So as to encourage dialectic, I have enabled commenting privileges to all, including those without Blogger or Google accounts.  So please, feel free to opine on my posts. I do not claim to have all the answers. I, like you, am just another inquisitive mind.  Ideally, comments will be thoughtful and substantive. That way, we can engage in a productive back and forth.  That said, I have always considered myself to be a free speech absolutist; censoring opposing views, or even speech I find to be utterly rebarbative, has never been my thing.  Trolls, too, will be welcome. I may later regret this... But the point of this blog, you see, is to encourage community. And community requires interaction. Therefore, it would be counterproductive for me to prohibit speech of any kind, or to put up barriers that require people to create an account in order to comment.  Now, being that this is the internet, I use the word "community" somewhat loosely. Some may call an online
Read more