By Keith R. Schmitz
And looking forward to it as well.
Jay will grace the Open Book Cafe tomorrow night with his original music. None of it will be posts set to music, but it will be a great way to kick off your Saturday night.
Here at the details. Drop on by!
Showing posts with label Jay Bullock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jay Bullock. Show all posts
Friday, January 22, 2010
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
A Point Of Interest
Friday, April 11, 2008
What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate
by capper
A couple days ago, Elliot Stearns posted the question, "Why does the Left in America hate America?" I posted a comment with an oversimplified view that there was a communication problem.
The next day, Jay put up a similar post, remarking on the loss of civility in people's postings and comments. This loss of civility has even caused yet another blogger, this time Patrick, to ban a commenter, mickey, who has a bad habit of making things personal with people with whom he disagrees. Owen Robinson, who also posted on the loss of civility had banned mickey a long time ago.
People, in general, often have a hard time expressing themselves in appropriate ways. In Jay's post, he mentions two bloggers who feel that this is the only way to get their point across. All they are really doing is blocking whatever message they wanted to express. If a person is insulted, they are not very likely to be receptive to the rest of the message. In my personal experience in real life and in the blogosphere, people are apt to me more receptive to what I have to say, if I don't call them a name or otherwise insult them. I, likewise, am more prone to pay attention if my dead mother isn't insulted, or I am called a name.
As I had mentioned in the comments thread at Elliot's site, I used to facilitate a anger management group for adolescent boys. The first thing I had to do was get them to understand what anger was. Anger is an emotion that is spurred by a real or perceived threat, harm or slight. The other normal responses to such a stimulus would be fear or sadness. However, in society, people are afraid to show signs of weakness so they try not to show fear or sadness. They chose, consciously or subconsciously, to go with anger.
The other thing I had to help these kids understand was to put what they deemed as threats or slights into proper perspective. Obviously, if someone is trying to cause you physical harm, you are going to want to fight to protect yourself. Someone calling you a name, or looking at you funny, is not on the same level, and does not merit the same response.
The hardest part was helping the kids learn to discern when they were feeling angry, what was making them feel that way, and thinking before acting and/or speaking in response to that stimulus. I think part of the reason that this was so difficult is that people don't like taking a close look at themselves in an honest fashion.
An excellent example of this would be the child that gets caught misbehaving, and then gets punished for it. First of all, the child is upset because s/he is being punished, which by definition is usually an unpleasant and averse situation. Secondly, the child, whether they realize it or not, is probably feeling shame for their behavior. But because shame is often considered to be a sign of weakness, it is covered up with anger. Then the child tells the parent that they hate them, or they take it out on their toys, etc.
Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people have a hard time moving on beyond this point. The adult who is caught breaking the law yells at the cops and calls them names. He or she is upset due to the threat of punishment, and lashes out in anger.
The blogger who makes a dumb comment, and gets called out on it, lashes back, often in a personal matter. He or she is threatened by the loss of face or the feeling of shame.
I think one of the biggest threats that people feel is the fear of the unknown and the different. This is where racism, sexism and other forms of prejudice stem from. Instead of facing their fear of the unknown or the different, and possibly making some unpleasant discoveries about themselves, they chose to fall back on anger and lash out at people, hurling invectives and smears at a person, a gender, a lifestyle, a belief system or a race.
To get back to Elliot's question, I don't think that these people, in general, hate America. I think it is a specific part that they don't like, but in the heat of their anger, they get carried away and start saying or doing dumb things. The same can be said for the other examples as well.
Now, keep in mind these are not universal truths. Sometimes anger is justified, such as when someone is presenting an immediate threat, or when someone does something that goes against the norms and morals of society, like a rapist, child molester or murderer. Sometimes the person cannot control their emotions, due to a mental illness or traumatic brain injury.
Nor am I saying I am above any of this. I get mad too, and sometimes I say and/or do stupid things. I am just sharing my thoughts on the matter. Thanks for reading, if you haven't already gotten bored and moved on.
A couple days ago, Elliot Stearns posted the question, "Why does the Left in America hate America?" I posted a comment with an oversimplified view that there was a communication problem.
The next day, Jay put up a similar post, remarking on the loss of civility in people's postings and comments. This loss of civility has even caused yet another blogger, this time Patrick, to ban a commenter, mickey, who has a bad habit of making things personal with people with whom he disagrees. Owen Robinson, who also posted on the loss of civility had banned mickey a long time ago.
People, in general, often have a hard time expressing themselves in appropriate ways. In Jay's post, he mentions two bloggers who feel that this is the only way to get their point across. All they are really doing is blocking whatever message they wanted to express. If a person is insulted, they are not very likely to be receptive to the rest of the message. In my personal experience in real life and in the blogosphere, people are apt to me more receptive to what I have to say, if I don't call them a name or otherwise insult them. I, likewise, am more prone to pay attention if my dead mother isn't insulted, or I am called a name.
As I had mentioned in the comments thread at Elliot's site, I used to facilitate a anger management group for adolescent boys. The first thing I had to do was get them to understand what anger was. Anger is an emotion that is spurred by a real or perceived threat, harm or slight. The other normal responses to such a stimulus would be fear or sadness. However, in society, people are afraid to show signs of weakness so they try not to show fear or sadness. They chose, consciously or subconsciously, to go with anger.
The other thing I had to help these kids understand was to put what they deemed as threats or slights into proper perspective. Obviously, if someone is trying to cause you physical harm, you are going to want to fight to protect yourself. Someone calling you a name, or looking at you funny, is not on the same level, and does not merit the same response.
The hardest part was helping the kids learn to discern when they were feeling angry, what was making them feel that way, and thinking before acting and/or speaking in response to that stimulus. I think part of the reason that this was so difficult is that people don't like taking a close look at themselves in an honest fashion.
An excellent example of this would be the child that gets caught misbehaving, and then gets punished for it. First of all, the child is upset because s/he is being punished, which by definition is usually an unpleasant and averse situation. Secondly, the child, whether they realize it or not, is probably feeling shame for their behavior. But because shame is often considered to be a sign of weakness, it is covered up with anger. Then the child tells the parent that they hate them, or they take it out on their toys, etc.
Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people have a hard time moving on beyond this point. The adult who is caught breaking the law yells at the cops and calls them names. He or she is upset due to the threat of punishment, and lashes out in anger.
The blogger who makes a dumb comment, and gets called out on it, lashes back, often in a personal matter. He or she is threatened by the loss of face or the feeling of shame.
I think one of the biggest threats that people feel is the fear of the unknown and the different. This is where racism, sexism and other forms of prejudice stem from. Instead of facing their fear of the unknown or the different, and possibly making some unpleasant discoveries about themselves, they chose to fall back on anger and lash out at people, hurling invectives and smears at a person, a gender, a lifestyle, a belief system or a race.
To get back to Elliot's question, I don't think that these people, in general, hate America. I think it is a specific part that they don't like, but in the heat of their anger, they get carried away and start saying or doing dumb things. The same can be said for the other examples as well.
Now, keep in mind these are not universal truths. Sometimes anger is justified, such as when someone is presenting an immediate threat, or when someone does something that goes against the norms and morals of society, like a rapist, child molester or murderer. Sometimes the person cannot control their emotions, due to a mental illness or traumatic brain injury.
Nor am I saying I am above any of this. I get mad too, and sometimes I say and/or do stupid things. I am just sharing my thoughts on the matter. Thanks for reading, if you haven't already gotten bored and moved on.
Monday, October 08, 2007
Jay Bullock Gets One Wrong
by capper
Just three short months ago, when I was first entering and exploring the blogosphere, Jay was kind enough to invite me to join his cast of thousands and become a contributor to folkbum's. And I am grateful for the chance to express myself to an audience considerably larger than I would have had if I went off on my own. However, at the risk of appearing the ingrate, I have to point out an error, or at least a partial error, committed by my gracious host.
Last week, Jay wrote an eloquent piece about Lena Taylor's announcement that she is running for Milwaukee County Executive. This post was so well written that it was even listed in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Best of the Blogs in yesterday's paper. The part of the post that I found to be erroneous is:
While all of this is undeniably true, he has committed the error of omission.
Saturday's MSJ had an article about the county board preparing to contend with Walker's proposed budget. The article points out that Walker's budget is dependent on receiving $19 million in increased state aid that is included in the Governor Doyle's and the democratic Senate's version of the state budget, but is absent in the republican assembly's version. Walker is also hoping for quick approval for a borrowing plan, else his budget explodes like each and every one of his budgets for the past several years.
While Jay points out, accurately, that Walker is willfully failing to meet the basic responsibilities of his job, the one he ran for, was elected for and the one he took an oath to perform, Jay does come up a bit short of the mark. The MSJ article reports that not only has Walker failed to stand up for Milwaukee County, he has attacked those that want to help Milwaukee. It is hard to be persuasive when you are biting the hand that feeds you.
In other words, Walker is not only failing to faithfully represent Milwaukee County, but he is willfully sabotaging any effort to help the county out of the miasma he has created. Or to paraphrase County Board Supervisor Quindel, who is cited as saying, in a bit of an understatement, Walker is "not very politically astute".
But the one truth Jay did hit on the head is that Walker needs to be helped out of office.
Just three short months ago, when I was first entering and exploring the blogosphere, Jay was kind enough to invite me to join his cast of thousands and become a contributor to folkbum's. And I am grateful for the chance to express myself to an audience considerably larger than I would have had if I went off on my own. However, at the risk of appearing the ingrate, I have to point out an error, or at least a partial error, committed by my gracious host.
Last week, Jay wrote an eloquent piece about Lena Taylor's announcement that she is running for Milwaukee County Executive. This post was so well written that it was even listed in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Best of the Blogs in yesterday's paper. The part of the post that I found to be erroneous is:
I did not ask at the time, although it seems obvious now in retrospect: Where was Scott Walker on the Assembly GOP budget that treated Milwaukee County like a toilet? Should it not be the responsibility of the Milwaukee County Executive to stand up for the county that he theoretically represents? But Walker's silence on the Assembly budget was deafening. He could not bring himself to stand up to his former colleagues and do his job.
And if Scott Walker doesn't want to do his job, we should help him out of it.
While all of this is undeniably true, he has committed the error of omission.
Saturday's MSJ had an article about the county board preparing to contend with Walker's proposed budget. The article points out that Walker's budget is dependent on receiving $19 million in increased state aid that is included in the Governor Doyle's and the democratic Senate's version of the state budget, but is absent in the republican assembly's version. Walker is also hoping for quick approval for a borrowing plan, else his budget explodes like each and every one of his budgets for the past several years.
While Jay points out, accurately, that Walker is willfully failing to meet the basic responsibilities of his job, the one he ran for, was elected for and the one he took an oath to perform, Jay does come up a bit short of the mark. The MSJ article reports that not only has Walker failed to stand up for Milwaukee County, he has attacked those that want to help Milwaukee. It is hard to be persuasive when you are biting the hand that feeds you.
In other words, Walker is not only failing to faithfully represent Milwaukee County, but he is willfully sabotaging any effort to help the county out of the miasma he has created. Or to paraphrase County Board Supervisor Quindel, who is cited as saying, in a bit of an understatement, Walker is "not very politically astute".
But the one truth Jay did hit on the head is that Walker needs to be helped out of office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)