Thinking all the thoughts

I was reading Across Five Aprils to the kids the other day, and when I came across this line, it struck me how it is just as relevant to today's political landscape as it might have been 150 years ago.

Brendon and I often have this conversation about politics: We wish people would be more generous to one another. 

So often it seems like one party or the other believes that they have a monopoly on the moral high ground, and the other therefore has the corner on deceit and manipulation. Why can't we acknowledge more often that both parties have their fair share of snake oil salesmen? And more importantly, why can't we recognize more often that the people on the other side of the political line are probably just like us--trying to make the world a better place, just with a different idea of how to accomplish that? By virtue of the vastly different life experiences we all bring to the table, of course people are going to have different ideas about the best way to get there. That should not mean the debate has to devolve into the "I'm smart/You're not/I'm good/You're bad" kind of conversations that happen on a daily basis on social media, on TV, and in our relationships. It gets us nowhere, and it also makes those who are somewhere in the middle of political debates (Hello--most people!) want to walk away from it all, and apathy grows. Bitter division and gross apathy--two things we really can't afford, but that are taking over.

I want to be more generous to others, to be more civil, to be a better listener. Because "though we may disagree, we should not be disagreeable."

P.S. On a related note, I have been using this NPR piece about vaccine safety in my composition classes to illustrate how listening and showing understanding are more likely to win the day over even clear facts. It's short and so interesting if you have a couple of minutes: "When It Comes to Vaccines, Science Can Run Into a Brick Wall."