In engineering's control theory, there exists something called a feedback loop. There is a positive feedback, and there is a negative feedback. If you remove negative feedback from any system, it always goes divergent and choatic. When people on the left and people on the right side of any argument (e.g like here in GS) always listen to the arguments that agree to their own way of thinking, then it becomes a dangerous situation. When there is no negatie feedback pulling you towards the center, you will invariably drift away to the exreme.
Its a responisbility on both sides of the debate to listen to the other side of the argument with an open and neutral and neutral mind. If not, then you will only going to be stuck in an echo chamber that will only amplify what you want to hear and there will be nothing left but yelling.
I think the question here is not whether GS awaam wants to listen to the opposing opinion or not.
E.g., I think that Biryaani is over-rated. A whole lot of people will disagree with me. That is fine. But If I keep harping the same thing and shoving the same "biryaani is over-rated" down other's throat, thats when the problem arises. I need to respect that people prefer biryani over pulao and its ok.
[quote=““Sheeda Pistol””]
I think the question here is not whether GS awaam wants to listen to the opposing opinion or not.
E.g., I think that Biryaani is over-rated. A whole lot of people will disagree with me. That is fine. But If I keep harping the same thing and shoving the same “biryaani is over-rated” down other’s throat, thats when the problem arises. I need to respect that people prefer biryani over pulao and its ok.
[/quote]
I think changes in thoughts, beliefs and attitudes happen gradually over a period of time on a societal and national level. You need time, I believe in the process of gradual evolution in the combined behaviors and attitudes of a populace as it lasts longer, is more stable and is natural process than revolution. History is riddled with examples of so called revolutions that happened quickly after a major tragedy or incidence that had an abrupt and severe effect on the psyche of a nation that happened at the whim of a few individuals or a rebellious group but its effects slowly dissipated.
The Soviet Union collapsed within an century of bloody revolution. Ataturk suppressed but could not change the religious attributes of his nation in a brisk and now Islamism is gaining traction again, Iran is slowly becoming liberal within 30 years of its own revolution despite all the restrictions and prohibitions. Point is attitudes of people change gradually and the rate at which this process runs is not same for everyone, it can take generations. Changing opinions through force and subjugation is not going to work, and might even be counter-productive
@navzzz the trajectory is downwards, when you think this is the low, they find a lower low. Not all societies survive, the death Knell is the foreign funded mercenary army colonizing the citizens.
But human abuses, exploitation’s and atrocities against weak and minorities are not biryani and people should talk about them as loud as possible. No one talks about Saudi atrocities in Yemen and you will tire of it without ever hearing it and as people of conscience say that silence is complicity
The both sides argument is what got society in the current state. The slogan Black Lives Matter is countered from the right wing with All Lives Matter. And the pundits and media insist we listen to “both sides”. And that we respect al points of view. Clearly one side is gaslighting, and should be ignored.
The justice system is rigged. But those who have not felt the brunt insist it is a fair system. No, their view point deserves neither respect not attention.
In every nation that has progressed, liberals lead the way. The right wing protest and halt progress to the best of their ability. And the Moderates? As one person famously asked, How about the Moderates?
If the people on the Left keep insisting their view points and opinions must be upheld and adhered to at all times by all sorts of people, then they become as inflexible and totalitarian as the people they are arguing with. They lose their moral high ground.
Just like life in general, peoples’ views and beliefs are never black and white, there are lot of grey areas that can be exploited to help guide them towards a more progressive path. Just telling them your opinion is right and theirs is bull and keep going on and on about it is not going to help much.
Indeed there are several situations where there is grey area. There are some areaS where it is black and white.Such as equality for all. On that, there really is no compromise. On all other issues, I agree with you.
It is the meme of the moderates who paint left and right with same brush. In my opinion, there is no middle ground when it comes to equality for all re race, caste, class, sexual orientation. None.
I do not believe in political labels such as left, right, conservative, liberal, open-minded, closed-minded, etc. I go on an issue by issue basis. Unfortunately, the internet failed to live up to its hype. Before the internet became common, I used to read how the internet will bring people closer and the whole world will be more understanding toward each other. That surely didn’t happen !
What happened is that the internet has magnified the fault lines and pulled society apart. Every now and then, I meet people who “know” a lot about Pakistan but haven’t met a single Pakistani in their life before me. It is like a guy who "knows" a lot about women but doesn't know any woman. Knowledge and information was never mixed up so badly. In the past, people of all sorts lived side-by-side without paying too much attention to each other’s political views. No one felt the need to express their political beliefs in public, let alone attempt to impose them on others. Families with incompatible lifestyles would limit their interaction without much issue. T-shirts with slogans were unheard of. People would vote quietly without feeling the need to tell even their own family members, let alone anyone more distant.
In the internet era though, either something is extremely right or extremely wrong. There is no middle ground. Instead of the internet becoming a reflection of society, societies are becoming a reflection of the internet. It is like the tail wagging the dog. The social media is used to influence elections, turn protests into riots, so on and so forth. For example, there was a WikiLeaks story a few years ago that disclosed chat bots pre-loaded with millions of comments to target Brazilian oil industry nationalization. I only see the divide to widen as years go on.
You raise some very good points. Despite all the progress and good things that have been made possible by the Internet, the World has become divided, opinionated and hostile because of it. You could even go on and argue had it not been the internet, a racist, misogynistic bigot would never have been elected as the POTUS.
BUT just like anything else, its not the Internet but the the people using it and the way they are using it is the main reason why we are living in such a messed up divided world. Again its the lack of the feedback lap that has caused this almost constant incessant echoing in the chamber. Do not shoot the messenger, do not blame the tools.
I think..ya opened..many different avenues or variants by posting this topic. Interesting nevertheless..as how people here shared their views. However, my own view is that..people are not tolerant to opposing views. Forget neighbor, friends, colleagues and acquaintances..depending on the dynamic of the relationship both Husband and Wife are not respectful and tolerant with each other..
What i am trying to say is..it’s perfectly fine to disagree on point of views..but please do not try to dominate each other because the relationship then becomes toxic..
So for a moment let us set aside the control theory! because it talks about feedback!
**What I see is happening with Modern Technology it has set itself above all theories! For Example take The Science of Micro Biology (Virus and Viral Disease control) and those who research in it! Because it is Scientific Research by Definition is not tolerant or conducive or Favorable to Feedback!
it relies totally on Data in these so called specialized Labs worked on by a few researchers in a controlled environment, controlled and FUNDED by the Mega Rich Elite! and since it is “Science” therefore No Lay Person can question there results and or Motives!
The output from these Labs has Created this Pandemic that the World has never seen before!
The World Leaders were lead like sheep to Lock down all social interaction and confine people to their tiny homes while the Mega Rich enjoy their resort like luxury homes!
Guess What …An Idol Mans Brain is the Devil’s Workshop!
So All them Idol peoples came out on the streets to express their ****frustrations…More So in the So Called ENLIGHTENED AND MODERN EDUCATED WESTERN SOCIETIES! LOL!..
WE did not see any ROITS in the THIRD WORLD!..Did We?..THE POOR PEOPLE HAVE NO TIME FOR ROITS …RIGHT?**
Thats a great topic and it can be discussed in so many ways.
If you are talking about the way we exhibit our differences online (like on GS etc) I blame the flux of keyboard warriors that start abusing the system on the wild wild west of internet. They stormed the online world like a broken dam just because they have access and nothing better to do
See, if you go back and think about pre-internet era, there were more listeners and less talkers. Those who used to talk were very sensible and educated people. More like intellectuals. Because they were avid readers as well as writers. Rest of the people were audience but they had incredible patience as well as the aptitude to understand the speakers. And then if there was a difference in opinion it was relayed in a very civilized manner.
When internet arrived and forums started appearing, the reflection of above could still be seen. There were differences of opinions but still were very civilized. Now the audience I mentioned above decided to jump in and talk as well. which is perfectly fine. So there was more noise than usual. And then when those newbie speakers realized they have far more options on internet they said you know what, eff it. We are not going to follow any protocol we will express the way we want and if you push us we’ll jump the ship and create our own thing since once again its a wild wild west we can do whatever we want.
As a famous saying in urdu, “Hum jungle ke badhshah hen anday den ya bache”
So what you see is a echo of that mentality.
Now it doesnt mean that the sensible people are extinct. They are still there and ready to converse in a very patient manner but when they see the nonsense spread by stupid keyboard warriors they are like nah, its better be quite. Rightly so. Thats why unfortunately you see more online chaos than an actual discussion.
You take the same assessment on the national and international level and you’ll see the exact same attitude. The Anarchists are yelling their throat out on streets (and online) and wise intellects are standing in the corner watching quitely.
[quote=““Sheeda Pistol””]
I think the question here is not whether GS awaam wants to listen to the opposing opinion or not.
E.g., I think that Biryaani is over-rated. A whole lot of people will disagree with me. That is fine. But If I keep harping the same thing and shoving the same “biryaani is over-rated” down other’s throat, thats when the problem arises. I need to respect that people prefer biryani over pulao and its ok.
[/quote]
I just had to say I disagree, strongly. I know Punjabis tend to prefer pulao over biryani, not all obviously, but quite a few do. My mom used to make pulao only for THE longest time, i probably had biryani for the first time after I turned 20ish, yes very sad. I mean, I like a good pulao but biryani is bae. Now, biryani with potatoes, that’s overrated. It’s just wrong, as wrong as tomatoes in pulao. Or pulao biryani, combined . shudders
This whole discussion that happened as a result of BLM has opened the eyes of many people, including mine. Including those with a white privilige. This has happened in part due to seeing the resistance of bigots and/or ignorants with the claim All Lives Matter. It has forced alot of people to change their (passive) stance, including those who claimed they ain’t racist because they don’t see colour. People have realized their white and brown privilige, they have accepted that they will probably never understand but will listen and educate themselves. And mostly, that being non-racist isn’t enough, we need to be anti-racist. It’s sad that this is still an issue in the 21st century when mankind has achieved so much, but even listening to a foolish point of view can teach us what not to do.
