Showing posts with label calm discussion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label calm discussion. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

When you disagree but are asked to work together


A friend offered a query for his creative peers, but you don't need to be in a creative field for this to apply. So many feelings get involved with that process, though, it's kind of the perfect crucible for this type of question. It's a question of ethics and allotting one's reserves, and it goes something like this:

Yep, it's like going into a dark tunnel, sure.
A friend you've known for years offers you a paying gig. It's a solid opportunity. You've known the person like half your life, so it would be cool to expand that through collaboration. It's a freelance job, and you'll be working together in some capacity. But while they're not a vile hate-monger, boy, do you not see eye-to-eye on some political matters. And as everyone knows, Politics has practically replaced Religion in matters of passionate conviction these days, to say nothing of what passes for discussion. So: take the job?

Inspired to reply, and then thinking it might be a cool discussion to pass along, the Be Chill, Cease ill on that count goes thusly:


You can probably do it. Know why? IF said friend understands how you feel differently- and for many of you, it might be hard to call you 'friend' and NOT know...but thinks you've got the chops, are reliable, and an all-right enough guy or gal to offer you a break...that counts for something. Mutual benefit of the doubt on differences. Just entering into evidence that speculation..not judging anyone. :-D If said difference doesn't have to enter the personal space, well awesome, cause it is, agreed, occasionally venomous. And some outlet for two fine, basically ethical friends to have discussions might even be welcome (it's agreeing upon the set of facts, these days, is it not, that is the issue?), but said friend would also probably understand a neat sidestep of "well, I think you're an intelligent, impassioned person, but I'd focus on giving our project our all and skip that exhausting subject, if ya don't mind" (the 'ya' is important, friend:-D)..Maybe flip a coin on it? Good luck.


There's so much upsetting stuff, and I've read we process 5 x the amount of information we did thirty years ago (I'm more than happy to limit my time on the 'Net for various reasons) so it can create quite a trainwreck in our nervous systems. I can dig it if you're concerned said friend will drift too often into that outlet out of a feeling of you becoming more of a confidante from long hours of collaboration. AS a writer, you get the advantage of understanding a bit how people with differing opinions, come to them, without having to embrace those that are stridently against your own ethics. Reason, we're finding, is tied first to feeling, then following that in its character. But my point was, so much BS out there and Anger, I find, is very hard to effuse in proportion once unleashed (kinda Love, too).

Like, when we go off, it's kinda the cumulative effect of all the things that tick us off, and so, embracing it can cause more strident reactions than we might intend. But you're a man of resolve, and if you have the reserves to avoid pressing the RAge button over the occasional annoyance, go for this! And honestly, if not, don't, because your peace counts for something, too. If they know you well at all, they may well have the prudence to realize they should steer away from certain querulous engagements, so, it's a matter of personal trust as well as assesment of and faith in your own reserves and qualities. WE do need unity beyond our differences, but you individually cannot hope to shoulder that burden for ALL- it's a gut-check, rather, of whether we have the strength to lift a given weight before us at a given time. If failure would be too costly, perhaps then we must decline certain challenges. But the willingness to take that chance when it is not a fool's errand but actually has a hope of a positive outcome- that is a sign of strength.

Our fears sometimes keep us from knowing the weight of that which lies before us, and sometimes our boldness makes us reckless. Courage and discernment must make friends and accomplish life together!

Then I'd step back from that equation and ask myself if I'd find the creative assignment engaging enough to warrant the investment.
I'm having a similar situation, with less guarantee it'll be remunerative in any fashion. These are the times that try the souls of folk, but while we might not always win, we can always learn and grow.


Friday, November 12, 2010

Corruption versus not corruption: the real funny business




Jon Stewart did an interview with Rachel Maddow. Can we have a calm discussion about it?

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/12/5452832-the-maddowstewart-interview-uncut#comments
I'm going to put in my two cents
about his comments, particularly as he attempted to find a way to establish conversation safely outside of left/ right being divided by anger.

I hope you enjoy my comments, at least. If the above is not your thing, don't worry:
I have an article on how cats use their tongues, and the conclusion of four top engineers follows:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/science/12cats.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

There are an enormous amount of pure lies out there, so discussing corruption accurately without demonizing available targets as a distraction requires a level head and humor. You may find neither of these people have those qualities, but if you feel that way I hope you at least gave their programs a shot rather than forming an opinion based only on secondhand opinions. They generated the conversation, but agreeing with them is not necessary to sharing the point.


I think Jon Stewart was about trying to make it easier to understand those we meet in casual life who might feel that way about Bush---so that the bitterness need not creep in real relationships. I think my politics make the most sense or they wouldn't be mine, but I want room in my life for people not of my persuasion.
The point that sticks out is: I want left/right dissolved in favor of corrupt/ not corrupt. He's trying to get people along the first divide to listen to one another and figure out how to discern using the latter. I understand feeling the left/ right divide IS largely one of corrupt/ not corrupt, though players arrive in Congress that diverge (from Democratic ideology, anyway; we might be about to see the same split with Tea Party/ Republican establishment). The important thing is: does one's p.o.v. require hate?
The question of how to keep the 24 hr. news cycle fired up is excellent material for analysis...maybe by someone smarter than Stewart, but lemme tell ya, whatever's worked out needs to be communicated, and in different styles. I watch BOTH! Much love. I like when he tells her "I like you."

Photo found at Flicker.