posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:07 PM
The stark contrasts of perceptions shown in the videos (and indeed on this thread) are a sad indictment of the polarised views of a very divided
country. It seems that communities are perceiving through fear, superstition, racial divisions, and ill-informed understandings regarding two
presidential candidates neither of which represent a 'whole' America. However, communities such as depicted in the two youtube videos are not just
to be found in America, they have their counterparts all around the world...both historically and contemporary.
Are any of us making condemnatory posts entitled to suggest that our own perception and opinion is any better than the opinions expressed in the
videos? If anything, the only difference I see is in the erudition and coherence of the opinions expressed. Remember, when we vote, we do so for a
candidate whom matches closely what we ourselves express, and are critical of those whom don't. Regardless of their education and/or socio-economic
status, or even their ethnicity, those in the videos are expressing opinions against a candidate they are critical of, and are entitled to do so, even
at the detriment of themselves being negatively perceived by the wider audience beyond their own community and state.
If this gives us all cause for concerns and worries, would it not be better to seek to balance their views by direct debate, rather than to condemn
them from a distance, regardless of the enormity of the task? Are we to expect them to somehow 'fix' what we may perceive as 'broken' whilst we
remain distant from them in lifestyle and life experiences? The divisions look deeply traditional, and will continue to be so unless they are engaged
directly, not just with a critical eye, but with a communial one. It is of great necessity to the nation as a whole that the insularism of these
far-flung (ideologically) communities be broken down, and that can only be achieved through direct debate and contact...not just around election
times, but at all times. Let us also note, that such contact is not primarily a one-way breakdown of division and erroneous perceivings, but two-way.
We have to break down our own ideological impedences in order to engage.
The first question we must all ask ourselves is 'would it be worthwhile to do so'? I believe it would. Mindsets have to be engaged in order to find
commonality and agreement. Without this commonality and agreement there is no nation, only different sizes of majorities, each fighting for a slice of
the pie, each fighting to conserve their traditional ideological differences. The greatest attribute of 'difference', is that it doesn't just tutor
some, but all...if we are willing to engage it.