Philosophy: Have you guys noticed that there is vanishing middle ground?

[Nas47]

Dare I choose the middle ground in this discussion and say that the middle ground still does exist, alive in the hearts and minds of many people--just that their voices are drowned out by the extreme view-holders?

It"s sounds beautiful what u write,that"s why i gave u thumb up,but in this mine territory middle ground cease to exist for sure.....and the things eventually should explode pretty soon....when the summer is gone and people start to return to their homes.Dark,dark age...never ever think,that i would see this madness.

 

[nepalnt21]

Most people believe there is only one correct way to think-- their way.

i think this is a sign of lower intelligence.

i dunno if it's true, but i've heard that the extremes of any ideology is where one may find the stupids.

goes along with the one about intelligent people being slightly unsure of themselves and stupid people being VERY sure of themselves. and the ole adage "it's hard to win an argument against a smart person, impossible against an idiot" (or something like that)

 

[Serhat]

You're not crazy to think that the social and political landscape has changed since the 1990s. There is a widely-acknowledged sense that public discourse has become more polarized in recent years, not just in the United States but in many parts of the world. Several factors contribute to this perception

1. Media Landscape: The way we consume news has changed dramatically with the advent of social media and online news sources, which can be more polarizing and designed to capture attention rather than to inform.
2. Political Polarization: Political parties in many countries have moved further apart ideologically, leaving less room for middle-ground or moderate positions.
3. Cultural Shifts: There have been significant shifts in cultural norms and attitudes, around topics like identity, religion, and social justice, which have also become more politically charged.
4. Economic Factors: Economic stresses, including inequality and job insecurity, can contribute to a polarized society as people look for solutions and scapegoats.
5. Global Events: Crises such as the 2008 financial crisis, ongoing conflicts, climate change, and most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, have intensified ideological divides.

In the 1990s, while there were certainly political and social divisions, there may have been more social spaces where politics did not dominate the conversation. There was less immediate access to news and opinion, and social media did not yet exist to amplify divisions. There were also fewer "culture war" issues at the forefront of national attention, or they existed in a different form than they do today.

So while it's subjective and depends on one's personal experiences and perspectives, there is evidence to suggest that public discourse was less polarized in the past and that being indifferent or moderate in one's political views was more commonly accepted.

 

[gordonliddy]

So while it's subjective and depends on one's personal experiences and perspectives, there is evidence to suggest that public discourse was less polarized in the past and that being indifferent or moderate in one's political views was more commonly accepted.

Richard Cheney has more to do with it than some people want to admit. He directed the FCC to eliminate provisions that required media companies to give air time to multiple points of view. In other words the style of media that most Americans watch today would have been unlawful twenty years ago because it wasn't balanced and didn't present both sides.

Additionally, without the 90's attitude to specifically, "Do your own thing" that has since gone out of vogue has reduced social pressure to behave like an adult and to generally ignore neighbors that you didn't like. Virtual signaling, anathema in previous eras is now tolerated or actively promoted.

 

[Electrum1]

Post #23 smells like ChatGPT

 

[Mjäll]

Very much so yes

 

[Dropperneck]

The things democrats believed in back in the 90s are considered fascist and bigoted now. Folx say its one side going majorly right, but I disagree. Look at abortion, dems used to believe in it only when necessary, now they want it at any time on demand. Fetal tissue markets likely caused a lot of this, but it’s a major move to the far left.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

I wouldn’t necessarily describe what they believed as “fascist”, but I do think that what the Democratic politicians like Clinton and Biden advocated for in the 90s regarding economics and certain social issues (esp. mass incarceration) doesn’t look so great in hindsight. In the context of recent events during that time, namely the 80s decade which didn’t feature a Democratic president & the end of the Cold War, economic chaos of the 70s etc, it’s pretty clear IMO that the Democrats did “move to the right” during the 90s on some important issues. They saw the GOP gaining success by using certain rhetoric/policies and sought to ape that for electoral success

 

[Serhat]

Post #23 smells like ChatGPT

Yes, I did utilize ChatGPT to help formulate some of the ideas in my post, but it's important to note that not everything was generated by the AI. I also incorporated my own thoughts and research into the discussion. ChatGPT served as a tool to help streamline and articulate complex topics, but the insights and expertise I added are my own.

 

[Serhat]

Richard Cheney has more to do with it than some people want to admit. He directed the FCC to eliminate provisions that required media companies to give air time to multiple points of view. In other words the style of media that most Americans watch today would have been unlawful twenty years ago because it wasn't balanced and didn't present both sides.

Additionally, without the 90's attitude to specifically, "Do your own thing" that has since gone out of vogue has reduced social pressure to behave like an adult and to generally ignore neighbors that you didn't like. Virtual signaling, anathema in previous eras is now tolerated or actively promoted.

Thank you for bringing up some really interesting points, GordonLiddy. The regulatory changes spearheaded by figures like Richard Cheney certainly had a lasting impact on the media landscape. The repeal of provisions like the Fairness Doctrine, which required the presentation of contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues, has led to more polarized and one-sided media outlets. This undoubtedly contributes to the polarization we see in public discourse today.

I also appreciate your mention of the cultural shifts since the 1990s. The 'Do your own thing' mindset certainly carried a degree of social fluidity and tolerance for differing opinions. While the rise of virtue signaling can certainly be seen as a byproduct of social media and more polarized political climates, it's a complex issue influenced by multiple societal changes over time.

However, it's essential to remember that while these are influential factors, they are part of a larger tapestry of social, political, and technological changes that have contributed to the state of public discourse today. The reality is that polarization is a multifaceted issue with roots that extend well beyond any single individual or policy change.

Would you agree that there are also other contributing factors to the current polarization, such as the influence of social media or the political leverage gained from polarization itself?