I don’t think it’s too idealistic, and it’s well said. Among my friends, I would be considered to be on the left on some issues, and more traditional with other issues. So I have friends who describe themselves knowledgeably as socialist and they’re my dearest friends, beautiful educated people who don’t embrace the extremes, but likewise I have many friends from the so-called right who are equally sharp and genuine in their beliefs. Both believe - by the way - that their political values will benefit society. None of them hold beliefs which contain prejudice against any minorities or gende.
The good thing is, we can talk. My best friend of all is a very liberal Catholic who has the most generous view of anybody. You see, I think people reach the dangerous extremes of a belief because they’re psychologically in need of extremes. They’re not thinking rationally on each issue. They’re trying to furiously plug a feeling of inadequacy. And this can get in the way of peaceful discussion and fruitful collaboration, because whether people like it or not, many countries in the west are hardening in their divisions but it is actually possible to sit down with somebody who is your polar opposite ideologically and have a good time, feel common purpose and learn something from each other.
As you rightly say, “we used to have a lot more respect for people of differing views.”
It brings me around to a related topic which we discuss elsewhere, which is the influence of social media, where - according to the experts - we’re being hacked by the algorithms, and dragged into a race to the bottom, being fed outrage and disharmony, misinformation, etc. And so the stats say that in America, what the tribes think the other tribe believe can be wrong by more than thirty percent. In other words, the echo chambers are resounding too loudly and we’re not leaving ourselves open to listening to the other side?
I don’t know the extent of the problem but I wonder if it’s a factor?
