Thank you Carol for your thoughtful deep dive into the complex currents of our time. Looking forward to meeting with Americans from all sides to discuss where the USA is headed and how we can ALL participate together for the good of the country we love. Looking forward to a Carol Horton book to help us all break out of these caricature traps and get to know each other again.
Carol, you articulate exactly what I'm seeing, experiencing, and feeling so well. I'm in an intensely progressive community (the theater world) within an intensely progressive community (Mpls-St. Paul). I voted for Harris, but it's not enough to shield me from suspicion and ostracism, because I too read and share voices from The Free Press, Tangle News, and other heterodox orgs and people. I don't know if some of my friendships and community ties will survive all this turmoil and vitriol, and it's really destabilizing. Thank you for this. I'm glad to know I'm not alone.
Thanks so much, Mo. I used to live in St. Paul (taught for a few years at Macalester) and it's crazy to me that the culture has changed so much. I have heard from several people about how difficult it is to live in the Twin Cities and not align with the political groupthink. The progressivism that I used to love there has turned into something else entirely. Very distressing. Hopefully it will evolve in a better direction. But in the meantime, yes, feeling less alone is very helpful for me, too. So thank you for taking the time to read and comment.
I guess these days I try to keep things simple, so I mostly avoid discussing politics in public (though my most recent podcast went there as an experiment).
But this is essentially the very thing that makes 'community' so banal, exhausting, and dangerous: the constant pressure to 'fit in', the policing of cognitive maps, the in group/out group bs, the lack of respect and recognition on the individual. We are social creatures, to be sure, and community is a way of integrating social behavior, etc. But putting community over individuality creates, let's just say, issues.
You are exactly right. When necessary, the individual must simply shut up, perform his function, try not to become judgmental, be helpful wherever possible, relinquish the desire to persuade, and refuse to become reactive. This can be lonely, but the living example of such a person is in fact powerful over time, and anyway, there's no other choice.
. . . and perhaps write a Substack and/or have discussions with sympathetic others in such small subcultural spaces to find solidarity and blow off steam! lol
Plug for Braver Angels! I'm an active member since 2016 and it has been sanity saving. Although membership skews blue (leadership is red/blue balanced at every level), its principles of speaking freely AND respectfully allow productive debates and a community with true diversity of views.
I was astonished by the clarity of this essay, which diagnoses on a large scale the same dynamic that plays out in the minds of every human individual, with always the same degenerative result in proportion to the degree of "malady": "[T]he more that individual Democrats keep themselves locked in the same old cognitive box, the more they will seriously undermine their mental health. . . [through] the division from others demanded, and the negative emotions constantly generated, staying there is like living in a small room with the walls closing in, making it harder and harder to breathe." So: False ideas, separation, imprisonment, and the threat of death.
Setting aside for the moment the pain of the individual divided within himself, you describe the pain of an individual who has come to feel alienated from his own community. There is a solution: It's slow-moving, not-flashy, and obviously not gratifying to the ego; but it works.
Hesitantly, I say the only comportment for the individual in such a group is simply to largely shut up, to perform his function very well, to ask for help and submit to the expertise of others where that is needed, to never participate in the BS (while also refraining from self-congratulatory airs), and to allow everyone to speak their minds without feeling judged. If possible, love everyone for who he is, regardless of the insanity of his ideas. If you aren't trying to persuade him, and you're a careful listener, this is actually pretty easy. A careful listener is also able to lightly question a person quite effectively--over time. In short, one must remain oneself (one's true, best self) without reactivity. Caveat: I'm speaking specifically of the group in which, "arguing with people who virulently disagree with me is counterproductive."
At a minimum, such an individual realizes his freedom in every situation, because he is neither restrained by the group nor wishing to persuade it. This freedom is through his way of being and not through his words (which are constrained). And yet, over time, he does become persuasive.
His way of being is the example of living that needs to be seen. Our society is evermore awash in words, many of them exemplary, like this fine essay. Our thoughts are better organized than ever, and while there's need for, and solace in, exchanging words with those who can sympathize with and clarify our ideas; we've got to transcend this eventually through the living of what we've understood, without reference to the false ideas, hatred, guilt-seeking, finger-pointing of others. It sounds lonely, but there's no other way, and this is the solution. Also, when you "center" your way of being over your way of persuasion through speech, it isn't really so lonely, afterall.
Westerners had this great spiritual leader in old times, often misunderstood in some quarters, entirely forgotten in others. He said, "Stop putting the guilt onto everyone. Love people for who they are. Forgive everyone for their thoughts and even their actions. Look, I'm going to show you serious I am about this. . . ." He claimed that his way was an escape from nihilism, and I think he was right. I hesitate to mention this, because others are ineluctably tempted to project upon me illiterate and unproductive judgments.
But I persist, because you asked not only for ideas about the solution, but about recommended people or groups. You might like Marianne Williamson, who ran (I think) on Bernie's platform, and who recently ran a substack livestream with Matt Taibbi. I think. . . she buys into some of the victimization claims more than I do (not sure), but she's definitely eyes wide open on the DNC media university monolith of the censorious left. Also, I'm sure that she sees "the solution" in difficult groups at least as clearly as me. I believe she's still trying to lead a movement in some way. . . not sure how. So, just an idea for you.
Anyway, thanks again for the essay. It helped to clarify my slow realization that this story of the left (which used to be my home) is quite analogous to the little wars that humans silently fight in their own minds, and how true it is that we often enslave ourselves to judgments in which we ferociously believe but which are largely false (and then react endlessly to one another's attacks, always thinking that we're the defender). This invisible internal war leads to the street war that you've described. The individual who has liberated himself from the internal war with false ideas will not participate in the street war of false ideas: Instead, he will love everyone and remain himself. (He will also make mistakes and laugh at himself.) Words are still important! But the west begins to need fewer words and more examples on every scale. The liberated individual within a group can be the example, but only through love and never through self-indulgent congratulations of one's superior understanding. There, I said it.
Wow, thank you for such a thoughtful and in-depth comment. I think you are pointing to a fundamental truth there and that's not easy. I agree with you on the value of prioritizing this way of being in the world. Easier said than done, of course. But we need to have a sense of what we're aiming towards if we're ever going to make any progress at all in that direction.
Thank you for your voice and expansive perspective - sure does feel needed right now. It astounds me that the people drugged by groupthink and doing the shaming and name calling don’t seem to realize they’re pushing many people (like me) further and further away. For me, this started in 2020 and continues.
Sadly, I think they know they're pushing people away but for the time being, have convinced themselves that it's necessary, or they don't care, or it's virtuous, or something.
I'm thinking that the circle will continue to shrink and become more adamant and embattled as it becomes clear that they're not pushing a program that most people want or like. Hopefully, though, this will produce some positive change sooner rather than later. Because there are certainly Democrats out there who don't want to keep losing and/or have more reasonable views that they've had to keep under wraps for years now in order to get by. Fingers crossed . . .
Thank you, Carol. This perfectly describes my own views and political movement over the past eight or nine years (except I never considered wearing a pussy hat). It would be ironic if self-proclaimed progressives end up suffering anxiety and other mental illness. They are responsible for so much of it.
lol ! That was a political fashion statement that did not age well. Beyond the cringe element, wokesters roundly denounced it as "transphobic" years ago in a classic circular firing squad manoeuvre.
No, the Democrats can't break out of their box, because they choose not to. Democrats have been telling men to buzz off for at least the last 30 years. They fund women's health, but ignore men's health. They talk about reproductive rights, but ignore the fact that men never had them. Back in February, Biden gave $100,000,000 of taxpayer funds to a White House women's health research initiative, and ZERO dollars to men's health. On Democrats.org, on the "who we serve" page, they mention serving women, but not men. James Carville pointed out how this was alienating male voters, but they rebuffed him, mentioning that the Democrats are "the party of women".
Well, they think they're the "party of women," but I don't think most women are on board with the sort of woke (and anti-men and masculinity) feminism they're pushing. I know I'm not.
It's fun to gently insert the thin edge of the wedge and help Progressives open their minds just a little. Carol is correct, hardcore Progressives are emotionally and intellectually trapped in dark airless rooms of their own making. So it's friendly and kind to help them escape!
My sapphire blue California county adores everything organic and I agree 100%. RFK Jr. provides the perfect opening. A good place to start the conversation is with healthy food....it can go sort of like this: Michelle Obama was right when she tried to improve school lunches, but mandating kids eat unfamiliar and squishy black bean salad was a non-starter. (A secret schoolyard black market in tasty junk food emerged almost instantly.) Michelle's initiative failed and was quietly abandoned. But we shouldn't give up!
RFK Jr. provides a better way forward: remove the most dangerous food additives and agricultural chemicals first, while educating the public. Push back against Big Food and Big Ag interests that corrupt elected leaders and public officials. Open up the conversation so previously censored scientific information on healthy food becomes widely available.
Progressives have a hard time claiming that healthy food is racist, sexist, etc. But...but...but...soon the question arises: why did Trump listen to RFK Jr.s wisdom while Democrat Party leaders marginalized the truth and the truth-teller? Then leave the question open and change the subject.
I hope that RFKJ's message on this gets out as I'm certain it will have broad support. Which, of course, is why leading Democrat-aligned media like the NYTs don't want it to. Literally, they don't report on the substance of the MAHA initiative at all. Intead, it's nothing but "anit-vaxxer," "wants to remove flouride from water," womanizer, weird incidents in past with animals, dangerous nutjob, etc.
The problem is that too many people have come to believe that it's their moral duty to never take in any information outside that information bubble. How to break that lockhold . . . I don't know. I did read that MSNBC's audience just dropped 54% after the election, though, so maybe it will happen organically. But in the meantime, breaking through the wall of propaganda when social dynamics mitigate against it has, in my experience, proved impossible.
Thank you Carol for your thoughtful deep dive into the complex currents of our time. Looking forward to meeting with Americans from all sides to discuss where the USA is headed and how we can ALL participate together for the good of the country we love. Looking forward to a Carol Horton book to help us all break out of these caricature traps and get to know each other again.
Thanks, Yo! I appreciate your support and look forward to more great conversations :)
Carol, you articulate exactly what I'm seeing, experiencing, and feeling so well. I'm in an intensely progressive community (the theater world) within an intensely progressive community (Mpls-St. Paul). I voted for Harris, but it's not enough to shield me from suspicion and ostracism, because I too read and share voices from The Free Press, Tangle News, and other heterodox orgs and people. I don't know if some of my friendships and community ties will survive all this turmoil and vitriol, and it's really destabilizing. Thank you for this. I'm glad to know I'm not alone.
Thanks so much, Mo. I used to live in St. Paul (taught for a few years at Macalester) and it's crazy to me that the culture has changed so much. I have heard from several people about how difficult it is to live in the Twin Cities and not align with the political groupthink. The progressivism that I used to love there has turned into something else entirely. Very distressing. Hopefully it will evolve in a better direction. But in the meantime, yes, feeling less alone is very helpful for me, too. So thank you for taking the time to read and comment.
Thanks, Carol - I empathise from afar.
I guess these days I try to keep things simple, so I mostly avoid discussing politics in public (though my most recent podcast went there as an experiment).
You probably heard this already, but it seemed to me helpful in its local and practical focus: https://tarahenley.substack.com/p/larissa-phillips-on-loving-your-neighbour
That said, I hear you on the appeal of a broader community!
I was going to post something ridiculous I came across yesterday that exemplified what you describe, but I’ll spare us that tedium 😅
Thanks for the link! I am a big Tara Henley fan and subcribe to Lean Out, but hadn't listened to that one yet.
But this is essentially the very thing that makes 'community' so banal, exhausting, and dangerous: the constant pressure to 'fit in', the policing of cognitive maps, the in group/out group bs, the lack of respect and recognition on the individual. We are social creatures, to be sure, and community is a way of integrating social behavior, etc. But putting community over individuality creates, let's just say, issues.
You are exactly right. When necessary, the individual must simply shut up, perform his function, try not to become judgmental, be helpful wherever possible, relinquish the desire to persuade, and refuse to become reactive. This can be lonely, but the living example of such a person is in fact powerful over time, and anyway, there's no other choice.
. . . and perhaps write a Substack and/or have discussions with sympathetic others in such small subcultural spaces to find solidarity and blow off steam! lol
Yes - there needs to be a dynamic balance, and that's not easy to achieve or, once it is, to have last.
Plug for Braver Angels! I'm an active member since 2016 and it has been sanity saving. Although membership skews blue (leadership is red/blue balanced at every level), its principles of speaking freely AND respectfully allow productive debates and a community with true diversity of views.
Thanks for the plug! I look forward to exploring it more in the future.
This is brilliant Carol. Thank you, I'm sharing with some friends.
Thanks Jean!
I was astonished by the clarity of this essay, which diagnoses on a large scale the same dynamic that plays out in the minds of every human individual, with always the same degenerative result in proportion to the degree of "malady": "[T]he more that individual Democrats keep themselves locked in the same old cognitive box, the more they will seriously undermine their mental health. . . [through] the division from others demanded, and the negative emotions constantly generated, staying there is like living in a small room with the walls closing in, making it harder and harder to breathe." So: False ideas, separation, imprisonment, and the threat of death.
Setting aside for the moment the pain of the individual divided within himself, you describe the pain of an individual who has come to feel alienated from his own community. There is a solution: It's slow-moving, not-flashy, and obviously not gratifying to the ego; but it works.
Hesitantly, I say the only comportment for the individual in such a group is simply to largely shut up, to perform his function very well, to ask for help and submit to the expertise of others where that is needed, to never participate in the BS (while also refraining from self-congratulatory airs), and to allow everyone to speak their minds without feeling judged. If possible, love everyone for who he is, regardless of the insanity of his ideas. If you aren't trying to persuade him, and you're a careful listener, this is actually pretty easy. A careful listener is also able to lightly question a person quite effectively--over time. In short, one must remain oneself (one's true, best self) without reactivity. Caveat: I'm speaking specifically of the group in which, "arguing with people who virulently disagree with me is counterproductive."
At a minimum, such an individual realizes his freedom in every situation, because he is neither restrained by the group nor wishing to persuade it. This freedom is through his way of being and not through his words (which are constrained). And yet, over time, he does become persuasive.
His way of being is the example of living that needs to be seen. Our society is evermore awash in words, many of them exemplary, like this fine essay. Our thoughts are better organized than ever, and while there's need for, and solace in, exchanging words with those who can sympathize with and clarify our ideas; we've got to transcend this eventually through the living of what we've understood, without reference to the false ideas, hatred, guilt-seeking, finger-pointing of others. It sounds lonely, but there's no other way, and this is the solution. Also, when you "center" your way of being over your way of persuasion through speech, it isn't really so lonely, afterall.
Westerners had this great spiritual leader in old times, often misunderstood in some quarters, entirely forgotten in others. He said, "Stop putting the guilt onto everyone. Love people for who they are. Forgive everyone for their thoughts and even their actions. Look, I'm going to show you serious I am about this. . . ." He claimed that his way was an escape from nihilism, and I think he was right. I hesitate to mention this, because others are ineluctably tempted to project upon me illiterate and unproductive judgments.
But I persist, because you asked not only for ideas about the solution, but about recommended people or groups. You might like Marianne Williamson, who ran (I think) on Bernie's platform, and who recently ran a substack livestream with Matt Taibbi. I think. . . she buys into some of the victimization claims more than I do (not sure), but she's definitely eyes wide open on the DNC media university monolith of the censorious left. Also, I'm sure that she sees "the solution" in difficult groups at least as clearly as me. I believe she's still trying to lead a movement in some way. . . not sure how. So, just an idea for you.
Anyway, thanks again for the essay. It helped to clarify my slow realization that this story of the left (which used to be my home) is quite analogous to the little wars that humans silently fight in their own minds, and how true it is that we often enslave ourselves to judgments in which we ferociously believe but which are largely false (and then react endlessly to one another's attacks, always thinking that we're the defender). This invisible internal war leads to the street war that you've described. The individual who has liberated himself from the internal war with false ideas will not participate in the street war of false ideas: Instead, he will love everyone and remain himself. (He will also make mistakes and laugh at himself.) Words are still important! But the west begins to need fewer words and more examples on every scale. The liberated individual within a group can be the example, but only through love and never through self-indulgent congratulations of one's superior understanding. There, I said it.
Wow, thank you for such a thoughtful and in-depth comment. I think you are pointing to a fundamental truth there and that's not easy. I agree with you on the value of prioritizing this way of being in the world. Easier said than done, of course. But we need to have a sense of what we're aiming towards if we're ever going to make any progress at all in that direction.
Thank you for your voice and expansive perspective - sure does feel needed right now. It astounds me that the people drugged by groupthink and doing the shaming and name calling don’t seem to realize they’re pushing many people (like me) further and further away. For me, this started in 2020 and continues.
Sadly, I think they know they're pushing people away but for the time being, have convinced themselves that it's necessary, or they don't care, or it's virtuous, or something.
I'm thinking that the circle will continue to shrink and become more adamant and embattled as it becomes clear that they're not pushing a program that most people want or like. Hopefully, though, this will produce some positive change sooner rather than later. Because there are certainly Democrats out there who don't want to keep losing and/or have more reasonable views that they've had to keep under wraps for years now in order to get by. Fingers crossed . . .
This sounds a lot like my story. I’m hopeful that some people will slowly come around. Good luck, and may reason prevail.
Thanks! Yes, I'm hopeful too.
Thank you, Carol. This perfectly describes my own views and political movement over the past eight or nine years (except I never considered wearing a pussy hat). It would be ironic if self-proclaimed progressives end up suffering anxiety and other mental illness. They are responsible for so much of it.
lol ! That was a political fashion statement that did not age well. Beyond the cringe element, wokesters roundly denounced it as "transphobic" years ago in a classic circular firing squad manoeuvre.
No, the Democrats can't break out of their box, because they choose not to. Democrats have been telling men to buzz off for at least the last 30 years. They fund women's health, but ignore men's health. They talk about reproductive rights, but ignore the fact that men never had them. Back in February, Biden gave $100,000,000 of taxpayer funds to a White House women's health research initiative, and ZERO dollars to men's health. On Democrats.org, on the "who we serve" page, they mention serving women, but not men. James Carville pointed out how this was alienating male voters, but they rebuffed him, mentioning that the Democrats are "the party of women".
Well, they think they're the "party of women," but I don't think most women are on board with the sort of woke (and anti-men and masculinity) feminism they're pushing. I know I'm not.
Thank you!
It's fun to gently insert the thin edge of the wedge and help Progressives open their minds just a little. Carol is correct, hardcore Progressives are emotionally and intellectually trapped in dark airless rooms of their own making. So it's friendly and kind to help them escape!
My sapphire blue California county adores everything organic and I agree 100%. RFK Jr. provides the perfect opening. A good place to start the conversation is with healthy food....it can go sort of like this: Michelle Obama was right when she tried to improve school lunches, but mandating kids eat unfamiliar and squishy black bean salad was a non-starter. (A secret schoolyard black market in tasty junk food emerged almost instantly.) Michelle's initiative failed and was quietly abandoned. But we shouldn't give up!
RFK Jr. provides a better way forward: remove the most dangerous food additives and agricultural chemicals first, while educating the public. Push back against Big Food and Big Ag interests that corrupt elected leaders and public officials. Open up the conversation so previously censored scientific information on healthy food becomes widely available.
Progressives have a hard time claiming that healthy food is racist, sexist, etc. But...but...but...soon the question arises: why did Trump listen to RFK Jr.s wisdom while Democrat Party leaders marginalized the truth and the truth-teller? Then leave the question open and change the subject.
This works!
I hope that RFKJ's message on this gets out as I'm certain it will have broad support. Which, of course, is why leading Democrat-aligned media like the NYTs don't want it to. Literally, they don't report on the substance of the MAHA initiative at all. Intead, it's nothing but "anit-vaxxer," "wants to remove flouride from water," womanizer, weird incidents in past with animals, dangerous nutjob, etc.
The problem is that too many people have come to believe that it's their moral duty to never take in any information outside that information bubble. How to break that lockhold . . . I don't know. I did read that MSNBC's audience just dropped 54% after the election, though, so maybe it will happen organically. But in the meantime, breaking through the wall of propaganda when social dynamics mitigate against it has, in my experience, proved impossible.