Politics and climbing

[mattp]

I find it "interesting" to see posts suggesting that some are somehow uncomfortable discussing politics while out climbing. Whether I agree with my partners' politics or not, I've always thought politics was just another thing to talk about along with everything else. I know that some people are uncomfortable acknowledging disagreement about even something as remote as George Bush's choice of cabinet appointments and if my partner doesn't want to talk about it, I'm happy to change the topic of course -- but I often wonder: why can't this guy discuss what they believe about events and persons that are really quite important?

[Dechristo]

-- but I often wonder: why can't this guy discuss what they believe about events and persons that are really quite important?[while climbing]

 

Perhaps, they prefer the focus of the party remain on the task at hand because:

 

1)unnecessary distractions can compromise the pro system

 

2)what is important, at the time, to you may not be important to them.

 

3)whining, however eloquent, can be a major buzz kill.

[ashw_justin]

I still think it's tragic that you guys are casting politics so dualistically. There are only the issues themselves; the rest is make-believe us and them bullshit. Yay team.

Besides, who decides what is "political" and what isn't?

[Adam13]

this just goes to show if u want to start a fight or an arguement just bring up politics or religion

[JayB]

Do you really think that it's an incapacity to discuss these things, rather than a disinclination to do so in a particular setting?

 

For my part, I'm certainly not worried that I lack the rhetorical tools, the conviction, or the knowledge necessary to debate the guy next to me into the ground if I chose to - that's just not the kind of interaction that I'm looking for when I'm pursuing a hobby in the outdoors - or at the Thanksgiving table, etc.

 

I think another variable that I factor into which topics I'll engage in serious discussion about involves the frequency with which that I am likely to see someone and the nature of our relationship in the future.

 

If I know I'm going to see someone quite a bit, and will establish a relationship that's significant enough to overcome whatever feelings might arise during some kind of ideological or political disagreement, then I'd be more likely to participate that kind of a conversation. If it's someone that I'm only likely to see a couple of times a year at most, or if I have no idea when I'll see them again - then it would be silly to introduce that kind of a challenge into the relationship that has such a slim basis to begin with, and which won't be remedied or rendered insignificant by more regular contact that doesn't involve disagreeing about religion or politics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Do you really think that it's an incapacity to discuss these things, rather than a disinclination to do so in a particular setting?

 

For my part, I'm certainly not worried that I lack the rhetorical tools, the conviction, or the knowledge necessary to debate the guy next to me into the ground if I chose to - that's just not the kind of interaction that I'm looking for when I'm pursuing a hobby in the outdoors - or at the Thanksgiving table, etc.

 

I think another variable that I factor into which topics I'll engage in serious discussion about involves the frequency with which that I am likely to see someone and the nature of our relationship in the future.

 

If I know I'm going to see someone quite a bit, and will establish a relationship that's significant enough to overcome whatever feelings might arise during some kind of ideological or political disagreement, then I'd be more likely to participate that kind of a conversation. If it's someone that I'm only likely to see a couple of times a year at most, or if I have no idea when I'll see them again - then it would be silly to introduce that kind of a challenge into the relationship that has such a slim basis to begin with, and which won't be remedied or rendered insignificant by more regular contact that doesn't involve disagreeing about religion or politics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXACTLY! +1

[mattp]

Given my interactions with you, Jay, that is more like the statement I'd expect. You are clearly quite confident in your opinions and well-versed in history and current events. Your prior post, however, said "I have no more interest in discussing politics while climbing than I have in discussing it at Thanksgiving dinner" or something like that. Like I said, I am more than happy to avoid uncomfortable topics - like you don't necessarily ask someone about their ongoing divorce or whatever - but I sometimes wonder why people can be so touch about their political views.

[underworld]

reactions when politics come up w/ a liberal:

 

- "whoa, you don't really believe that"

- "WHAT? you just don't understand things"

- "Dont tell me you're one of them"

- "how can you POSSIBLY side with them"

 

real condusive to conversation. if you ask me, liberals are far less willing to talk politics. VERY eager to teach politics...very unwilling to discuss them

 

(w/ some exceptions, of course)

[KaskadskyjKozak]

reactions when politics come up w/ a liberal:

 

- "whoa, you don't really believe that"

- "WHAT? you just don't understand things"

- "Dont tell me you're one of them"

- "how can you POSSIBLY side with them"

 

real condusive to conversation. if you ask me, liberals are far less willing to talk politics. VERY eager to teach politics...very unwilling to discuss them

 

(w/ some exceptions, of course)

 

the typical reaction I find, when they discover you are not in their "tribe" (as Jay so eloquently describes it) is to shut up immediately, followed by that oh-so-uncomfortable silence.

[mattp]

KK, it has been you and your friend Fairweather who call people assclowns and - what was it? - dick wad or something? I think intolerance, condescension, and even belligerent proclamations that "you wouldn't dare say that to my face" are AT LEAST as common coming from the right as the left around here. If you ever share a rope with me I'm certainly likely to say "you gotta be nuts to believe THAT," but I'll listen to whatever you might have to say.

[JayB]

Given my interactions with you, Jay, that is more like the statement I'd expect. You are clearly quite confident in your opinions and well-versed in history and current events. Your prior post, however, said "I have no more interest in discussing politics while climbing than I have in discussing it at Thanksgiving dinner" or something like that. Like I said, I am more than happy to avoid uncomfortable topics - like you don't necessarily ask someone about their ongoing divorce or whatever - but I sometimes wonder why people can be so touch about their political views.

 

Well for me it's not my own touchiness about my own political views that's at work - it's other people's reactions to them. Having lived and socialized in settings where my opinions on a number of topics are in the minority, and where people hold contrary opinions with a certain zeal, and respond to dissent from them with a certain degree of indignation (which seems to be more common amongst folks who live in an environment where the broad majority shares their views) - discretion is the better part of valor, IMO.

 

I was less inclined to hoist the agnostic flag with folks that I met in Colorado Springs when I was living there, than I would be in the neighborhoods that I spend most of my time in here in Boston, ditto for various economic topics in Boston than in Colorado Springs.

 

If you happen to be a fairly ardent Christian in Colorado Springs, or someone who is convinced that trade in the absence of subsidies and tariffs is mutually detrimental to any parties which choose to engage in it in Boston - then you're much less likely to have to introduce as much discretion into your discussion of these topics.

 

If I want contentious discussions, want to invoke negative responses from those in whatever group I happen to be surrounded by - I have no doubt that I'll have plenty of opportunities to do so at times or places of my choosing, if the setting was appropriate or the stakes were high enough.

 

Someone who espouses Creationism at a dinner party will get a much different response from me than someone arguing for the inclusion of creationism into the local curriculum at a school board meeting.

[mattp]

Yes, we can get pretty damn smug when we have a certain viewpoint and everyone we knows agrees with us, but on the other hand I'd say those who are the most shrill in their expression of their opinions are often those who feel embattled because they hold the minority view.

 

I think the issue is partly related to what Ashwu is talking about, noting how polarized we are. Yes, it is not just a black-or-white / democrat-or-republican world but any active reading about or watching news shows about politics for the last fifteen years reveals a high degree of cynicism and polarity even where the players may be well intentioned and the issues may be multifaceted. It is the Republicans' fault, of course.

[JayB]

I'd say the shrill-factor depends on the person more than anything else, but most people who hold minority viewpoints have to temper the shrillness quite a bit if they want to avoid compromising their casual social relationships, or workplace relationships by presenting contrary viewpoints every time the opportunity to do so arises.

 

Anyone who doesn't want to retreat into a compound or needlessly alienate people that they might otherwise get along with is going to have to learn how to deal in one way or another, and I think more what you are likely to see is a certain sense of relief in the company of the odd kindred spirit, more than any open hostility in the presence of those who share the sentiments of the majority.

 

 

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

If you ever share a rope with me I'm certainly likely to say "you gotta be nuts to believe THAT,"

 

I doubt it.

 

 

 

[Bug]

I have a degree in religious studies and was a political consultant for several years.

 

Anybody want to go climbing?

 

Actually, my goal in life is to understand those who disagree with me. This is a christian teaching, believe it or not. It goes along with the christian teaching to love everyone (regardless of their religious or political persuasion). This requires a lot of listening.

 

Most christians fall on their face in this regard. Most other religions produce similar zealotry.

 

As for politics, Jefferson wrote a treatise on "Being a Citizen" that should be taught in all levels of all schools. The basic tennet is that all people have a right to be heard and ANY effort to quash dissention is un-patriotic.

Why can't we all just get along?

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

If you ever share a rope with me I'm certainly likely to say "you gotta be nuts to believe THAT,"

 

I doubt it.

 

 

 

[Spencer]

I have learned a couple things here

1. this would make a great political cartoon with the political debate going on on as your being belayed.

2. never debate with JayB he far more articulate than I am and whatever his political beliefs may be I would probably agree to not "look stupid".

3.NASCAR is still a conservative sport, and no one cares.

Edited August 27, 2007 by Spencer

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I have learned a couple things here

1. this would make a great political cartoon with the political debate going on on as your being belayed.

2. never debate with JayB he far more articulate than I am and whatever his political beliefs may be I would probably agree to not "look stupid".

3.NASCAR is still a conservative sport, and no one cares.

 

NASCAR is a conservative sport? Based on what? The South voting for Bush? They voted for Bubba too.

 

[Adam13]

I think the fact that you will see about 100 confederate flag shirts for each "legalize it" shirt u see at a nascar race makes it a conservative sport.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I think the fact that you will see about 100 confederate flag shirts for each "legalize it" shirt u see at a nascar race makes it a conservative sport.

 

so "liberal" = "pot smoker"?

 

how old are you? let me guess, 18-25?

[Adam13]

liberal does not equal potsmoker just like not everyone in the south flys the stars and bars. but its a pretty good representation of groupings of people, you're pretty ignorant and assume alot of shit get off your computer and climb asshole

[Adam13]

and im only 23 but all that means is ive had less time to be jaded by idiots like you.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

and im only 23

 

gee, that was tough to figure out

 

 

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

get off your computer and climb asshole

 

No thanks; I'll leave that to you.

[underworld]

liberal does not equal potsmoker ... but its a pretty good representation of groupings of people, I'm pretty ignorant and assume alot of shit