Sam (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
l33tminion) wrote2004-11-04 02:11 am
l33tminion) wrote2004-11-04 02:11 am
Wiki Politics
A few days ago, on Wikipedia, I became involved in a long-standing debate on the future of the site. The debate is between two factions, Inclusionists and Deletionists. Inclusionists believe that Wikipedia should be improved based on a standard of usefulness, the greatest good for the greatest number, and thus feel that Wikipedia should include lots of articles on obscure and esoteric topics in addition to more mainstream or "notable" material. Deletionists believe that Wikipedia should be an ideal encyclopedia based on a variety of aesthetic standards, and advocate that articles that are not "worthy" or "notable" should be deleted. After consideration, I decided that I agreed with the Inclusionists.
During this time, I talked to another Inclusionist editor was facing partial banning for rules violations and alleged POV edits (his edits to micronations articles were disputed as POV because the user is apparently the Emperor of Atlantium, a micronation. I knew the editor was well meaning, but I criticized him for not controlling his temper. Even when disagreeing with other editors, I feel that it is best to view such a conflict as a conflict between teammates, not a war among enemies. After all, all the editors, except true vandals (who are very rare), share a common goal, to improve Wikipedia. Honest discourse is only productive way to attempt to resolve such conflicts.
Today, I was thinking about politics due to the recent election, and wondering why so many Americans support George Bush, when it seems so clear to me that his policies are unsound, his promises are unreliable, and his diplomacy is atrocious. It would be easy to dismiss the conservatives as evil, or simply close-minded or unintelligent. Yet I know many conservatives are none of those things. Then I thought of my recent conversation, and realized what I had said applied to politics.
Conservatives and liberals are not enemies but, rather, teammates in democracy. I honestly believe that nearly all conservatives and nearly all liberals truly want what is best for America. The two groups just have different visions of how to achieve it. Honest discourse is the only way to make real progress towards one's political ideals, not mud-slinging, demonization, or angry rhetoric. I know I must have hope, keep faith that progress will prevail, that things will improve. I will believe in the basic goodness of humanity; my trust will not be shaken.
But it is so hard to be calm. I feel the choice of the conservatives this election will have an incalculable cost. I feel I have witnessed the downfall of a nation. And that saddens me, because I love America.
And it is so hard to believe in human decency when your state, and ten others, have taken a step backwards in civil rights, showing the majority's support for callous cruelty and intolerance.
At Open today, a student stated that people need to be upset, when the upsetting issue is important. I agree: People should be upset when there is injustice. A professor stated that he wished the South had won the civil war. Someone sent to Students (the mailing list for all students) an article from 2000, fastidiously suggesting that the North should secede from the South. People feel that America is, in many ways, two countries. In many ways, our nation is already divided. Perhaps conflict is the only solution. Perhaps, as Jefferson said, a little rebellion is necessary for the government. Perhaps a little rebellion will not be enough.
So what should we do? Submit or rebel? Is there a third possibility? Can we truly unite as a team, as a nation? Together, we can achieve something great. But with such division, unity may be impossible. And united we stand. Divided we fall.
And I feel I have seen the downfall of America.
During this time, I talked to another Inclusionist editor was facing partial banning for rules violations and alleged POV edits (his edits to micronations articles were disputed as POV because the user is apparently the Emperor of Atlantium, a micronation. I knew the editor was well meaning, but I criticized him for not controlling his temper. Even when disagreeing with other editors, I feel that it is best to view such a conflict as a conflict between teammates, not a war among enemies. After all, all the editors, except true vandals (who are very rare), share a common goal, to improve Wikipedia. Honest discourse is only productive way to attempt to resolve such conflicts.
Today, I was thinking about politics due to the recent election, and wondering why so many Americans support George Bush, when it seems so clear to me that his policies are unsound, his promises are unreliable, and his diplomacy is atrocious. It would be easy to dismiss the conservatives as evil, or simply close-minded or unintelligent. Yet I know many conservatives are none of those things. Then I thought of my recent conversation, and realized what I had said applied to politics.
Conservatives and liberals are not enemies but, rather, teammates in democracy. I honestly believe that nearly all conservatives and nearly all liberals truly want what is best for America. The two groups just have different visions of how to achieve it. Honest discourse is the only way to make real progress towards one's political ideals, not mud-slinging, demonization, or angry rhetoric. I know I must have hope, keep faith that progress will prevail, that things will improve. I will believe in the basic goodness of humanity; my trust will not be shaken.
But it is so hard to be calm. I feel the choice of the conservatives this election will have an incalculable cost. I feel I have witnessed the downfall of a nation. And that saddens me, because I love America.
And it is so hard to believe in human decency when your state, and ten others, have taken a step backwards in civil rights, showing the majority's support for callous cruelty and intolerance.
At Open today, a student stated that people need to be upset, when the upsetting issue is important. I agree: People should be upset when there is injustice. A professor stated that he wished the South had won the civil war. Someone sent to Students (the mailing list for all students) an article from 2000, fastidiously suggesting that the North should secede from the South. People feel that America is, in many ways, two countries. In many ways, our nation is already divided. Perhaps conflict is the only solution. Perhaps, as Jefferson said, a little rebellion is necessary for the government. Perhaps a little rebellion will not be enough.
So what should we do? Submit or rebel? Is there a third possibility? Can we truly unite as a team, as a nation? Together, we can achieve something great. But with such division, unity may be impossible. And united we stand. Divided we fall.
And I feel I have seen the downfall of America.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I admit in my post that I am not sure if America can stay truly united. I think cooperation is a good thing if both sides do truly share a goal, but perhaps such a superordinate goal no longer exists between liberals and conservatives. Perhaps cooperation is too costly. Perhaps I am foolish to have hope.
no subject
no subject
no subject
True, there are the vandals of the real world, who look out only for themselves, or for no one. But I think that most people try to do the right thing. For the most part, the conservatives' intentions are good, even though I feel that their actions are very harmful. Not that good intentions excuse such actions, but I still feel that the common goal is there, even though the two sides have totally different visions of how to achieve that goal.
And I know some actions are so harmful that cooperation costs more than conflict. That may be the case with the conservatives. But, if that is true, this nation has lost all hope of unity. Is this the case? Perhaps. I don't know.
What do you think, Zak? Would you group the conservatives with criminals? Are their actions so dangerous that cooperation has too great of a cost? Or is cooperation useless in this case, with the visions of liberals and conservatives being so different that the idea of improving America can no longer be considered a uniting, superordinate goal?
no subject
Maybe it is more useful for me to group them with sinners than with criminals. I know that there are many anti-religious liberals out there, but I am not one of them. In fact, I am coming to think that morality(and perhaps even rectitude) without divinity is meaningless, which would make the notion of "wrong" or "evil" governments equally meaningless.
It is vital that we not cooperate in the unjust actions of conservatives. We may, however, cooperate when they are not trying to do something unjust. We may pass certain bills with them, eat dinner with them, and live among them; it is not that they are conservatives that they are unjust, it is what they do and what they advocate. Moreover, it is our responisbility toshow them why we are correct, and to treat them with all the love that you can. We must wage shocking and awesome love on the world, that they will know our Justice.
no subject
no subject
no subject
And please, no secession! The South is still lagging far behind as far as civil rights are concerned, how will they ever catch up if there's no-one left to kick their butts?
no subject
Um, sorry, got a little carried away. I really love grits.