Political discussion is requiredProductive, Honest and Civil
Relying on half the news or even just the news is not good enough. Patriotic citizens should get information from fact base sources and having meaningful dialog with those we do not agree with to help us making an informed decision. That is the only way to assure we keep those we elect working for we the people.
That is easier said than done, this process and these ground rules for political discussion will help us have productive, honest and civil discussions about issues that affect us all.
Why? The end results …
The entire discussion thread / set of threads can be seen in those related forums. This site will summarize them side by side for all to see. Every position is a “moving document” that will adjust as sites provide more details about their viewpoints. Even viewpoints on one side may differ and they will all be included in the summary.
Ground RulesA key to honest and civil convo
Ground Rules for the overall discussions:
- A original point is made by one person
- The other person acknowledges the point, refutes the point or provides an alternate view with details
- The originator of the point will then discuss the facts provided, such as alternate view or refusion details
- This happens until there is either a mutual understanding that is agreed to by both sides or the viewpoints that are not aligning that makes that impossible should be noted
- Once both sides have decided the topic at hand is thoroughly discussed, the discussion on that topic ends
- Ground rules should be followed to help assure a useful, honest and civil political discussion
Break the PatternsThat obstruct honest and civil discussion
There are natural reactions that have to be overcome to have healthy and civil political discussions.
These include the following, open to add more to the list. Provide a comment on the YouTube video.
- Changing the subject
- Without completing the ground rules for an honest topic of one discussion
- For example, if the ACA regulations are used as one of many examples of why we need to regulate business, a discussion on the effectiveness of the ACA is not relevant to the original point and is hence a subject change.
- Unrelated Personal Attack
- Telling someone they are stupid is a personal attack
- Telling someone they are not acting patriotic if they do not consider / discuss all the facts in an honest way, is an observation, not a personal attack. If someone refuses to have an honest conversation, on either side, then call them out on it, anything else is wasting time. That is also not a valid excuse to get mad and leave.
- Getting Mad / Leaving
- If someone is misrepresenting your position, write out your position and post it as your viewpoint. Getting mad because the other person “is putting words in your mouth” is not productive.
- Getting upset because you feel like the questions are all “gotcha questions” and leaving wastes everyone times.
- Posting unrelated MEMEs or quotes without explaining
- All MEMEs, links or quotes should be backed with a summary in the persons own words. Explain what it means and what others should expect to get out of it.
- Posting a “reaction” like ha ha and leaving
- If you think what a person is saying is not valid, explain why and back it up. Registering your displeasure isn’t a good use of time by anyone.
- Ignoring factual / good points by simply not acknowledging them as a factor. This is a big reason conversations end up being non-productive. That is the “honest” part of having a civil and honest discussion.