• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Grant D. Cyrus of Boulder writes:

I try to remain in touch with while humbly listening to a wise, well-aged mensch or two in my life, like a lot of people I know. But still, I tend to muse a bit politically.
It (the excitement) comes from the challenge of attempting to communicate political and social observations within the most culturally, racially,and intellectually mixed and economically powerful platforms, countries and peoples in the world -and definitely in this hemisphere- America and Americans. Or more specifically the US. Hey, BOULDER, Colorado!
This country has the potential for having some of the most advanced Progressive and creative people on the face of the Earth. I believe this. I’ve met some. I often feel privileged to have even been born here and now living here today among Americans in America. I’m able to speak freely, frankly about what I think is happening to, in the country. And I certainly appreciate this.
In that spirit I would like to ask if you think it’s fair to say that we all begin politically at Center- a basic, neutral, fair, objective and completely open-minded and unassuming political Center? Education, personal experience and observation, culture, close family and friends, oh and our own personal preferences then have the tendency to draw us towards Center Left or Center Right. This isn’t the worst place (either one) in the world to be (though I am more the former myself.) Some may say that this is all rather obvious.
I say not so fast. Where language has been hijacked, manipulated, subverted and/or otherwise distorted by extreme, inflexible and uncompromising diehard ideologues from any and all directions they (staunch, limited die-hard ideologues) can become dangerous obstacles to internal and external peace and diplomacy.
Someone once said something about combining or integrating ‘the finest elements /components of Socialism and Capitalism which would result in a system that could sustain the planet.’ When ideologues discuss, debate or argue we generally have the proverbial irresistible force meeting the immovable object. Scientists say the result is disintegration.
I would much rather see our government representative’s compromise and integrate the superior components of various political and economic thought rather than disintegrate before my eyes. Surely you agree, no?

This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

What?

I would say we do not begin at the political center, but have been manipulated by those in positions of power as a child to have a predisposition (be it our parents, our teachers, our clergy...). It is when we mature and begin to recognize those prejudices that we truly will see what the other is saying. Those that never recognize the prejudices within, are those that maintain, typically partisan, party mantra, regardless of conservative or liberal, they belong in the closed mind category of politics. It is those that we truly need to be weary.

The goal should then be to try and understand the value that left of center, right of center ideology brings to the table, and engage in dialog that will bring the sides together, through compromise, action, and determination to succeed, instead of point fingers, lay blame, and callously comment "THEY DID IT TOO!"

I see what you are trying to say Mr. Cyrus, and I applaud you for your attempt to end partisanship, by expanding an open mind philosophy. My guess is you will get slammed from both extremes. Conservatives will see "Boulder" and dismiss you without reading your comments, and liberals will take it to mean, the "close minded conservatives need to give in more." But it is refreshing to see someone extol the virtue of understanding and dialog.

Compromise is fine...as long as you compromise to my position.

When there is a right and a wrong, where can you compromise? You do not compromise with the creeping crud of socialism. You fight it with every tool and every ounce of strength.

If only it were as simple as a choice as "right or wrong".

Dravur:

In matters of opinion, there is no right and wrong. While to you socialism may be "creeping crud" to be fought at all costs, you have to realize that not everybody shares the same views you do, and that yes, perhaps it might be time to compromise.

Or, let's put it another way: You do not compromise with the creeping crud of republicanism. You fight every tool with every ounce of strength.

Do you see how that argument is as valid as what you've offered? You are the perfect example for Cyrus's letter, though I doubt you know it.

The only compromise that never works is the one you try on people who have determined who is right and who is wrong and have presumed, before either side opens their mouths, that they are Gods gift to the ignorant who must be so because they do not agree. Hear me darvue?

When did politics become dictated by corporations? I've never been politically active, but the more I learn, the more enraged I am that, " of the people, by the people and for the people " is no longer part of the political venue.
When Haliburton moves to the United Arab Emirates, and several days later, our President wants to sell several or our ports to the same. When their head offices move to the Caymans to avoid paying taxes on the billions they are making off the war. Who gains? It certainly isn't the working class.
It always seems to come back to corporations and the palms they grease. I know I am not the only one that sees this, I just happen to think that we can change this.

I think Grant is trying to say, "Don'e be sheep." But other than Linaya, I hear a whole lotta Baaaaaaa.

6:29,

How is Linaya being sheep? This is an observation made by Linaya, are these observations not factually correct? Sounds pretty clear to me. These things did and are happening!!

Mike D

re-read 0:29 - they indicated "OTHER THAN" Linaya, not that Linaya was being a sheep

You say:
In matters of opinion, there is no right and wrong. While to you socialism may be "creeping crud" to be fought at all costs, you have to realize that not everybody shares the same views you do, and that yes, perhaps it might be time to compromise.

No matter how factual the idea, there is always someone who thinks that it is wrong. And no matter how stupid the idea is there is always someone who thinks it is fact.

By that standard there are no facts, since everything is a matter of opinion.

Linaya, did you grow up in Morrison, Colorado?

Yaakov,

The writer said: "In matters of OPINION there is no right or wrong." (Emphasis added.)

You stretch this sensible point far beyond breaking, by equating "opinion" and "fact" as "idea".

Are you presenting that stupid idea as if it were a fact? Or is that stupid idea just your opinion?

Okay Old Grouch, please name one idea on which there is 98% agreement that it is a fact.

Then name one idea on which there is 98% agreement that it is a matter of opinion.

And in both cases define where the 98% is drawn from.

Yaakov,

Fact: The sun shines in the daytime. Drawn from the congruence of words in all languages concerning "sun", "shine/light" and period of time.

Opinion: Strawberry ice-cream tastes good. Drawn from, again, the congruence of words for an expression of PERSONAL CHOICE in all languages, i.e., "taste"

In both the abstract, and in common usage, the difference between them - fact and opinion - is generally acknowledged.

In and of itself, the matter of an expression of "taste", "like", "dislike", etc., has no abstract position of "right" or "wrong". And in the limited consideration of it being personal expression, it may also be considered a matter of "fact" - again without abstract "right " or "wrong" conotations - for the person expressing.

One can mis-state concerning "fact"; and in so doing has entered the abstract area allowing for judgment of "right or "wrong". The judgment itself enters the area of opinion; and in no way validates, or invalidates, the fact as such. The confusion there lies in equating the two, rather than attempting to distinguish the fact for itself.

Conversely, a correct statement of fact is also not validated or invalidated by mis-judgment, or by opinions concerning its status as fact.

It is not a matter of percentages.

POST A COMMENT

• 'Kid Nation' reality show a new low
• Rivers a shameful hire
• Too little news
• ‘Diesel’ fumes
• Unlocalized story a disservice to readers
• Riled up by Christian music
• Darling of the left
• Solutions too costly