I have a question for everyone to discuss. What is tolerance? There are several groups that push their own variety of tolerance. Some push some form of religious tolerance, some push tolerance of some type of behaviour, some push tolerance of various ethnic groups, age bands or political movements. My question though does not look at any specific group but instead at the word itself, what is tolerance?
Does tolerance equate acceptance? If I tolerate a certain behaviour, do I have to accept and legitimize it? Do I have consider that behaviour that does not conform to the "norm" just as "ok" as the "norm"? Or, do I literally just have to put up with it and not persecute? I guess what I mean is, how do I demonstrate tolerance? Moreover, how do I demonstrate tolerance if that particular group's morals, norms, ideals, activities, whatever go directly against my personal set of beliefs? If that is the case, are my beliefs "wrong"? If your answer to that question is yes, are you being intolerant toward me?
Do your answers to those questions change if I talk about tolerating an ethnic group instead of a behaviour group? What if I ask those questions about a political movement? What if the questions are about a new religious movement or even an old religious movement that starts to take off in "your" country?
Again, I am not looking specifically at any current movement--I know the marriage rights camp is in full swing right now. That just has me thinking about the concept of tolerance. More, it has me thinking about human behaviour and our built in tendency to flock to similar people and shun "weird" people (based on our own personal definitions of weird).
For me personally, I tend to believe in the live and let live side of things. I think our government gets WAY too involved in WAY too many aspects of our lives and stirs the pot by sort of picking and choosing the winners in all sorts of arenas. I think our lives would be way simpler if the government got out of 60% of the things it sticks its nose into and just let us live our lives. I think people would naturally evolve into a tolerant culture if there were not divisions placed (socioeconomically, socially, etc.) by our benevolent, omnipotent government.
I am inviting you to share your opinions on this topic. I posed lots of questions. Feel free to pick one or two or reply to the whole thing. The only thing I ask is that you refrain from rudeness. Be respectful and share your thoughts. Others will do the same.
Showing posts with label america. Show all posts
Showing posts with label america. Show all posts
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Changing the World One Rude Comment at a Time
I know you have all seen them or maybe even participated in one--a Facebook argument. Is it just me or does it seem Facebook has reduced the tactfulness of your friends? It also seems to embolden people to get into "discussions" that they would never get into face to face. Why is that?
My theory is that people assume some level of anonymity online--even if it is Facebook and has their pictures, name, etc. People will type things into a comment box they would never say out loud and would definitely never say to someone's face where they get instantaneous feedback with all the non-verbal parts--emotion, tone, body language, etc. The comment box has taken away a lot of the consequences that have typically kept free speech civil.
See, the First Amendment says the government will not punish you for things you say or ideas you express (and even that is somewhat limited). It does not guarantee speech with no repercussions from society, individuals, businesses, etc. The digital environment gives us freedom from a lot of the uncomfortable situations that have typically kept people nice in their discourse. You don't have to see the person start to cry when you say something that hurts their feelings. You don't have to see their face turn bright red when you embarrass them. You don't have to feel the angry tension in the air when you say something just to get someone riled up. You just type it and walk away from the computer or set your phone down or whatever. It almost seems like the old adage has changed to "if you can't say anything nice, then just post it on Facebook."
I read comment after comment after post after comment from my "friends" that are just downright mean. Sometimes you might think they are being playful mean or just joking with someone. The problem is that the same loss of non-verbal cues that embolden you to make the comment also make the tone of the comment flat so it is impossible to know if it is a joke or not. The scary part is that I am starting to notice this online phenomenon creep into the non-online society at large. People seem to be forgetting how to have a discussion civilly. Maybe I am too sensitive but I don't think so. There doesn't seem to be as high of a value on "niceness" anymore. Is this a symptom of an online culture--de-sensitized to rudeness?
Would love to know your opinion on this, and don't hold back! Does the online environment (and not just Facebook either--it's just an easy target) contribute to an erosion of manners and "niceness"? If it is worth reversing, how does one go about doing it? Am I making a big deal about something that is not really a problem?
My theory is that people assume some level of anonymity online--even if it is Facebook and has their pictures, name, etc. People will type things into a comment box they would never say out loud and would definitely never say to someone's face where they get instantaneous feedback with all the non-verbal parts--emotion, tone, body language, etc. The comment box has taken away a lot of the consequences that have typically kept free speech civil.
See, the First Amendment says the government will not punish you for things you say or ideas you express (and even that is somewhat limited). It does not guarantee speech with no repercussions from society, individuals, businesses, etc. The digital environment gives us freedom from a lot of the uncomfortable situations that have typically kept people nice in their discourse. You don't have to see the person start to cry when you say something that hurts their feelings. You don't have to see their face turn bright red when you embarrass them. You don't have to feel the angry tension in the air when you say something just to get someone riled up. You just type it and walk away from the computer or set your phone down or whatever. It almost seems like the old adage has changed to "if you can't say anything nice, then just post it on Facebook."
I read comment after comment after post after comment from my "friends" that are just downright mean. Sometimes you might think they are being playful mean or just joking with someone. The problem is that the same loss of non-verbal cues that embolden you to make the comment also make the tone of the comment flat so it is impossible to know if it is a joke or not. The scary part is that I am starting to notice this online phenomenon creep into the non-online society at large. People seem to be forgetting how to have a discussion civilly. Maybe I am too sensitive but I don't think so. There doesn't seem to be as high of a value on "niceness" anymore. Is this a symptom of an online culture--de-sensitized to rudeness?
Would love to know your opinion on this, and don't hold back! Does the online environment (and not just Facebook either--it's just an easy target) contribute to an erosion of manners and "niceness"? If it is worth reversing, how does one go about doing it? Am I making a big deal about something that is not really a problem?
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
A Lie I Never Addressed
So, I had this series of blogs I wrote a few months back called "Great American Lies". In that series I rambled on about various lies built into our culture. It was a good series and got lots of comments. I'm sure not everyone agreed with me and that's what made it fun. It also got me started blogging on a regular basis instead of randomly. I have a few lies that did not make the first series and I will write on them sporadically if nothing else interests me on a given Wednesday. Today I am going to write about the lie that "you can be anything you want to be."
This is a lie that starts at our very core. America is the "Land of Opportunity" and as such, we believe that someone can dream big and make it bigger. The problem with this lie is that it is so very incomplete. In other words, there are LOTS of caveats to this statement. "Want" is not enough. You must identify the small steps to make it to your end result. You must work through the inevitable setbacks. You must gain the skill, education, experience, credentials, friends or whatever to make it to that final goal. In other words, you can't be anything you just "want" to be.
I find it interesting/annoying also that some folks look down on people that arrive at a destination in life because of a friend or family name. Some people do have a better launching platform than others. For some the journey to "what they want to be" is much shorter. One of the beautiful things about this lie is that there is some truth in it, though. It IS possible for someone with nothing to be something spectacular--IF and only IF they are willing to make the sacrifices, do the work, make the connections, take the risk, chart the path and again, do the work to get there. It is absolutely possible for someone raised in poverty to become a brain surgeon or a major politician or whatever. WE OURSELVES make this more difficult by holding onto the lie that all we have to do is "want" to be something.
Then we really mess things up when we look at this lie as a lie but from the wrong angle. What I mean is that some people identify this as a lie by saying, "In America, you can't be anything you want to be because you are _______" and they fill in that blank with anything from a specific race to a specific religion or "not from a certain family" or whatever. They identify this as a lie but they miss what the lie actually is. The lie is in the statement's incompleteness, it is not actually a lie in and of itself. You CAN be anything you want to be IF you are willing to work for it. Call it a lie of omission.
This is a lie that starts at our very core. America is the "Land of Opportunity" and as such, we believe that someone can dream big and make it bigger. The problem with this lie is that it is so very incomplete. In other words, there are LOTS of caveats to this statement. "Want" is not enough. You must identify the small steps to make it to your end result. You must work through the inevitable setbacks. You must gain the skill, education, experience, credentials, friends or whatever to make it to that final goal. In other words, you can't be anything you just "want" to be.
I find it interesting/annoying also that some folks look down on people that arrive at a destination in life because of a friend or family name. Some people do have a better launching platform than others. For some the journey to "what they want to be" is much shorter. One of the beautiful things about this lie is that there is some truth in it, though. It IS possible for someone with nothing to be something spectacular--IF and only IF they are willing to make the sacrifices, do the work, make the connections, take the risk, chart the path and again, do the work to get there. It is absolutely possible for someone raised in poverty to become a brain surgeon or a major politician or whatever. WE OURSELVES make this more difficult by holding onto the lie that all we have to do is "want" to be something.
Then we really mess things up when we look at this lie as a lie but from the wrong angle. What I mean is that some people identify this as a lie by saying, "In America, you can't be anything you want to be because you are _______" and they fill in that blank with anything from a specific race to a specific religion or "not from a certain family" or whatever. They identify this as a lie but they miss what the lie actually is. The lie is in the statement's incompleteness, it is not actually a lie in and of itself. You CAN be anything you want to be IF you are willing to work for it. Call it a lie of omission.
Friday, January 13, 2012
The Lie: The First Ammendment Entitles You to Say Whatever You Want With No Consequence
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Words are very powerful tools. In a lot of ways more powerful than guns and bombs. Words plant ideas. Words cause harm. Words leave scars. Words can build people up and tear them down. Words can erase pain and cause it. Words cannot be taken back. Always keep that in mind when you use words. Always make sure you have thought through the gravity of your words.
My favorite college class session of all time was my very first one. I had Dr. Larry Burriss for an honors section of Intro to Mass Communication. By all accounts it appeared to be a dull class. Then he opens up with the question, "What does the First Amendment mean?" Everyone kind of looked at each other and one brave soul says, "Freedom of speech." He says, "Ok, what does THAT mean." Someone else chimes in with, "You can say whatever you want." This is exactly what he was waiting to hear. For the next 5 minutes he goes on a tirade of separating the class by every racial slur, offensive name calling, and rude category of person you can think of (and some you can't). At the end he says, "If I didn't touch on your particular group, don't worry, I will get you next class. I am an equal opportunity offender." We of course just stare at him with huge eyes and mouths agape. Perfectly executed. Complete silence. Then Dr. Burriss says, "so, do you still think you can say whatever you want?"
What followed was an incredibly thoughtful, well mediated discussion on the First Amendment and what it really means to have "freedom of speech." I never looked at it the same again.
Many of you may have seen the discussion on my Facebook page on Sunday. That incident is the catalyst for this blog post. Here's the gist of what happened. After Church I got home and logged into Facebook. Jonas was in the room right next to me. As soon as I logged in, the second post in my "newsfeed" was a JPEG image of text. The text was supposed to be some "instructions" to men on how to properly satisfy their women. It was incredibly vulgar with a plethora of "F words" and some other vulgarities. Normally, I just ignore those types of posts (though I have never seen one on FB that was that vulgar). For whatever reason though, I started to read the comments. First, the post I was reading was actually a "share" that my friend had done from one of his friend's pages. The very first comment was basically saying that the post was way over the line. What ensued was a barrage of "freedom of speech!", "if you don't like it don't read it!", etc. Though I normally agree with those sentiments, I take exception to public forums. In other words, if I am walking in a park and someone with a bull horn is shouting those types of things, I would get riled up. In that setting, I do not have the option to "not listen". Same goes for Facebook in a lot of ways. It is an online public park with everyone shouting whatever is going on in their little corner of the universe. It also happens to be one where the more attention you get, the longer that shout stays in front of everyone. It also happens to be one where the only way you ignore something is after you have already taken it in. THIS is what motivated me to very nicely explain that freedom of speech isn't as cut and dry as the commenters were trying to make it. Then it got out of hand.
I am typically a pretty savvy guy when it comes to technology. That said, Facebook is constantly evolving, constantly changing the way you interact. If you don't truly stay on top of every little change, the technology can easily get away from you. This is what happened to me on Sunday. My comment, though trying to be a lesson in civility and trying to help a young man better understand good taste, tact and community, ended up splashing the offensive "picture" on all of my friends' (over 1000) news feed. Thankfully, Stephanie Wright alerted me to this incredible lapse of knowledge and I started damage control. My wife finished the damage control by making my comment go away but not before numerous people saw it and commented on my apology post. I am sure that many others saw it and did not comment. I was, and still am, very embarrassed to have shared that with so many others. That said, it did give me the inspiration for this particular blog (that is two days late because of all the stuff I wanted to include).
The First Amendment DOES NOT Mean You Can Say Whatever You Want With No Consequence
Many, many people have a misconception about what the First Amendment does and does not do. It only says that (and I am paraphrasing) Congress shall not abridge the freedom of speech. This simply means that the government, specifically Congress cannot pass laws making it illegal for you to say what you want to say. There is no constitutional protection from your peers, from other authorities, from the general public, etc. Let's talk about some examples.
Let's pretend you go into a movie theater for the premiere of the next great movie and it is totally packed. You take a seat at the back of the theater and you take out your camera phone because you want to capture the next viral video. As everyone sits, you yell, "FIRE!!! SOMEONE SET THE CURTAIN ON FIRE!! (when in fact it is not)" Mass hysteria breaks out and everyone starts running for the door. Will you get in trouble? Yes probably. In Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969 the commentary (the actual cliche comes from 1917 case) the rule is that the first amendment does not protect speech that is meant to and likely will incite imminent lawless action (riots) or that is reasonably believed to cause malicious actions (like stampeding out of the theater).
Let's pretend now that you are on Facebook or in front of a group of people or you tweet that you have devised a plan to kill the president and will begin execution of said plan in 48 hours. What do you think will happen? At the very least you will get a visit from the Secret Service. There is ample evidence that you will get quite a bit more depending on the veracity of your claim and the way you deliver it. It could be as much as 3 years in jail and a $250,000 fine (its true, look it up).
But I though we had free speech? I was only joking when I said I wanted to assassinate the president. I was making a documentary when I yelled fire in that theater. The law does not protect all speech. And we didn't even look at censorship--truly limiting the speech to certain audiences.
Let's look now at some other ways free speech is not as free as you might think. Society is not bound by the same rules the government is. In other words, our culture at large can be very, very judgemental and even cruel. Three great examples come to mind immediately. Don Imus, Hank Williams Jr. and the Dixie Chicks were publicly berated because of stupid comments they made. They were not arrested, not jailed, not fined by the government. They probably didn't get visits from the Secret Service but man did the public rake them over the coals. Of course various people called for punishments and various others said it was "free speech". In fact, both sides are wrong. The only punishment that is due someone in those situations is exactly the punishment they got--public reaction. Don Imus still has a radio show because enough people are entertained (or shocked) by his venom. Hank Jr. lost his job because the TV station was too afraid of the public backlash against his dumb comment. The Dixie Chicks were greatly harmed financially by that one stupid comment--but they weren't arrested. My point is this, we have freedom to say most things without oppression from the government. We do not have free reign to say whatever we want with absolutely no repercussions. Think about that the next time you are so quick to shout, "free speech, free speech"!!!!!
Words are very powerful tools. In a lot of ways more powerful than guns and bombs. Words plant ideas. Words cause harm. Words leave scars. Words can build people up and tear them down. Words can erase pain and cause it. Words cannot be taken back. Always keep that in mind when you use words. Always make sure you have thought through the gravity of your words.
My favorite college class session of all time was my very first one. I had Dr. Larry Burriss for an honors section of Intro to Mass Communication. By all accounts it appeared to be a dull class. Then he opens up with the question, "What does the First Amendment mean?" Everyone kind of looked at each other and one brave soul says, "Freedom of speech." He says, "Ok, what does THAT mean." Someone else chimes in with, "You can say whatever you want." This is exactly what he was waiting to hear. For the next 5 minutes he goes on a tirade of separating the class by every racial slur, offensive name calling, and rude category of person you can think of (and some you can't). At the end he says, "If I didn't touch on your particular group, don't worry, I will get you next class. I am an equal opportunity offender." We of course just stare at him with huge eyes and mouths agape. Perfectly executed. Complete silence. Then Dr. Burriss says, "so, do you still think you can say whatever you want?"
What followed was an incredibly thoughtful, well mediated discussion on the First Amendment and what it really means to have "freedom of speech." I never looked at it the same again.
Many of you may have seen the discussion on my Facebook page on Sunday. That incident is the catalyst for this blog post. Here's the gist of what happened. After Church I got home and logged into Facebook. Jonas was in the room right next to me. As soon as I logged in, the second post in my "newsfeed" was a JPEG image of text. The text was supposed to be some "instructions" to men on how to properly satisfy their women. It was incredibly vulgar with a plethora of "F words" and some other vulgarities. Normally, I just ignore those types of posts (though I have never seen one on FB that was that vulgar). For whatever reason though, I started to read the comments. First, the post I was reading was actually a "share" that my friend had done from one of his friend's pages. The very first comment was basically saying that the post was way over the line. What ensued was a barrage of "freedom of speech!", "if you don't like it don't read it!", etc. Though I normally agree with those sentiments, I take exception to public forums. In other words, if I am walking in a park and someone with a bull horn is shouting those types of things, I would get riled up. In that setting, I do not have the option to "not listen". Same goes for Facebook in a lot of ways. It is an online public park with everyone shouting whatever is going on in their little corner of the universe. It also happens to be one where the more attention you get, the longer that shout stays in front of everyone. It also happens to be one where the only way you ignore something is after you have already taken it in. THIS is what motivated me to very nicely explain that freedom of speech isn't as cut and dry as the commenters were trying to make it. Then it got out of hand.
I am typically a pretty savvy guy when it comes to technology. That said, Facebook is constantly evolving, constantly changing the way you interact. If you don't truly stay on top of every little change, the technology can easily get away from you. This is what happened to me on Sunday. My comment, though trying to be a lesson in civility and trying to help a young man better understand good taste, tact and community, ended up splashing the offensive "picture" on all of my friends' (over 1000) news feed. Thankfully, Stephanie Wright alerted me to this incredible lapse of knowledge and I started damage control. My wife finished the damage control by making my comment go away but not before numerous people saw it and commented on my apology post. I am sure that many others saw it and did not comment. I was, and still am, very embarrassed to have shared that with so many others. That said, it did give me the inspiration for this particular blog (that is two days late because of all the stuff I wanted to include).
The First Amendment DOES NOT Mean You Can Say Whatever You Want With No Consequence
Many, many people have a misconception about what the First Amendment does and does not do. It only says that (and I am paraphrasing) Congress shall not abridge the freedom of speech. This simply means that the government, specifically Congress cannot pass laws making it illegal for you to say what you want to say. There is no constitutional protection from your peers, from other authorities, from the general public, etc. Let's talk about some examples.
Let's pretend you go into a movie theater for the premiere of the next great movie and it is totally packed. You take a seat at the back of the theater and you take out your camera phone because you want to capture the next viral video. As everyone sits, you yell, "FIRE!!! SOMEONE SET THE CURTAIN ON FIRE!! (when in fact it is not)" Mass hysteria breaks out and everyone starts running for the door. Will you get in trouble? Yes probably. In Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969 the commentary (the actual cliche comes from 1917 case) the rule is that the first amendment does not protect speech that is meant to and likely will incite imminent lawless action (riots) or that is reasonably believed to cause malicious actions (like stampeding out of the theater).
Let's pretend now that you are on Facebook or in front of a group of people or you tweet that you have devised a plan to kill the president and will begin execution of said plan in 48 hours. What do you think will happen? At the very least you will get a visit from the Secret Service. There is ample evidence that you will get quite a bit more depending on the veracity of your claim and the way you deliver it. It could be as much as 3 years in jail and a $250,000 fine (its true, look it up).
But I though we had free speech? I was only joking when I said I wanted to assassinate the president. I was making a documentary when I yelled fire in that theater. The law does not protect all speech. And we didn't even look at censorship--truly limiting the speech to certain audiences.
Let's look now at some other ways free speech is not as free as you might think. Society is not bound by the same rules the government is. In other words, our culture at large can be very, very judgemental and even cruel. Three great examples come to mind immediately. Don Imus, Hank Williams Jr. and the Dixie Chicks were publicly berated because of stupid comments they made. They were not arrested, not jailed, not fined by the government. They probably didn't get visits from the Secret Service but man did the public rake them over the coals. Of course various people called for punishments and various others said it was "free speech". In fact, both sides are wrong. The only punishment that is due someone in those situations is exactly the punishment they got--public reaction. Don Imus still has a radio show because enough people are entertained (or shocked) by his venom. Hank Jr. lost his job because the TV station was too afraid of the public backlash against his dumb comment. The Dixie Chicks were greatly harmed financially by that one stupid comment--but they weren't arrested. My point is this, we have freedom to say most things without oppression from the government. We do not have free reign to say whatever we want with absolutely no repercussions. Think about that the next time you are so quick to shout, "free speech, free speech"!!!!!
Friday, March 26, 2010
A certain large financial institution
Ok, so there is this one particular financial institution that the federal government deemed too large to fail. I will allow it to remain nameless but lets just say it can be found in most any city in America I know exactly why the government saved this bank. Its because they are run the same way. If it can be done inefficiently, thats how this bank does it. So far in my fledgling career, I have had 3 interactions with this bank. All three have been lousy. The first one was with a "local" branch (which is laughable by the way). The young man purchasing my first listing went through them. We closed about 2 weeks late (a little over 6 weeks after binding agreement). Why, you ask? Because the guy didn't have a credit score and they had to do actual underwriting. It completely freaked them out. Selling Sam and Candace's house, I am dealing with these folks again. The loan guy will not ever answer his phone or return calls. We are already about 3 weeks after the "realistic" closing date. We bumped the date to this past Wednesday. On Tuesday he tells the closer on our side that he needs 24-48 hours to complete this one extra task. Do we have anything yet, NO!!! Meanwhile Sam and Candace are incurring charges every day on their house. On the other side, we are buying a home in short sale with this particular institution. It is going somewhat smoother but still, the communication is lacking. They keep everything secret. A tip for them, let folks know what is going on and what to expect. If you don't meet your own deadline, let people know. It's called customer service. Apparently when you are too big to fail and nanny government will always bail you out, you forget what customer service is (or perhaps you just plain don't care).
Addendum: I understand that some people will say, just go somewhere else. The problem I am having is that I never solicited their business. Buyers of my listings have come to the table with them as business partners. I am at their mercy and my client's (much more importantly) are at their mercy. It seems as if they take their time because they can. I also understand that the actions of a few do not indicate the performance of everyone in the company, but, I am 3 for 3. 100% of my interactions have been lousy. I also know that the bailout money is not the cause of the bad service. They were lousy before the bailout. That's probably why they had to have it!!
My advice, if there are good people at the local level, let them run it. Decentralize and allow efficiency to take over. Quite being so dadgum big and corporate and inefficient! Remember, the customer is the first part of customer service. For all of you out there, stay away from this bank. They tell everyone that they are struggling with the overwhelming amount of work. Help them out by not giving them any more work to worry about.
Addendum: I understand that some people will say, just go somewhere else. The problem I am having is that I never solicited their business. Buyers of my listings have come to the table with them as business partners. I am at their mercy and my client's (much more importantly) are at their mercy. It seems as if they take their time because they can. I also understand that the actions of a few do not indicate the performance of everyone in the company, but, I am 3 for 3. 100% of my interactions have been lousy. I also know that the bailout money is not the cause of the bad service. They were lousy before the bailout. That's probably why they had to have it!!
My advice, if there are good people at the local level, let them run it. Decentralize and allow efficiency to take over. Quite being so dadgum big and corporate and inefficient! Remember, the customer is the first part of customer service. For all of you out there, stay away from this bank. They tell everyone that they are struggling with the overwhelming amount of work. Help them out by not giving them any more work to worry about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)