Can the United States Remain United?

-

This is a guest post by Caroline Esser, a research associate with the New America Foundation’s Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program.
At the same time that Steve was streaming a live video of Monday’s New America event with Eli Pariser, the author of The Filter Bubble, we were pondering similar questions to those raised in Pariser’s book at the Center for Social Cohesion’s event, “Can the United States Remain United?”
In his recently published book, Pariser discusses the dangers of the filter bubble, or the “personal ecosystem of information that’s been catered by” the algorithms of companies like Google, Facebook, or Yahoo to match users’ individual interests. Instead of exposing users to new ideas and connecting diverse people from around the world, Praiser fears that the internet is instead “connecting us back to ourselves,” serving as a powerful reinforcement of our previously held beliefs.
According to Bill Bishop, the filter bubble phenomenon is occurring not just within digital media but also on a much broader scale in American society. Bishop, the author of The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart and a panelist at the Social Cohesion event, found that despite the unprecedented numbers of immigrants arriving in the United States and the increasing diversity of the population, individual communities are themselves becoming more and more homogenous. Simultaneously, the differences between communities are become greater and greater. Income differentials are rising and partisan alliances are polarizing between communities–each bastion of American society is falling away from the mean. Why is this occurring? According to Bishop it is because of the unique freedom (and burden) each American has to create his or her own identity. In a society that glorifies the individual, each citizen has the ability to choose where to live and what type of people to surround him/herself with. As a result, like the web searches that simply connect us back to ourselves, Bishop argues that Americans are seeking out communities that constantly reinforce their lifestyles and beliefs. Cross-cutting relations with people of diverse opinions and ways of living are becoming increasingly rare.
Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who opened the conference with a short speech, quipped that the best way to overcome divisions within the U.S. is to “get everybody together…and sit around outside and eat Mexican food and drink beer and make friends with each other. That worked.” Despite the refreshing honesty and simplicity of O’Connor’s advice, I left feeling that Bill Bishop and Eli Pariser’s work has called into question whether or not it is still possible to get a group of diverse Americans together in Justice O’Connor’s backyard for a friendly, open-minded conversation. Is there enough binding each American together–a greater set of shared American values grounded in the country’s founding documents–for Justice O’Connor’s plan to work? Or is all that unites us now the freedom to choose our lifestyle and a tolerance of those who have chosen differently?
— Caroline Esser

Comments

24 comments on “Can the United States Remain United?

  1. David says:

    @aviv That comment should be attributed to me. Not sure why it came up as aviv’s comment. I was the one in the Home Depot parking lot in Jacksonville.

    Reply

  2. questions says:

    Pareene!
    Herman Newticks (!!) answers DeLong’s question in the comments section.

    Reply

  3. questions says:

    Pareene!
    And here’s what Google is investing in:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/google-ideas-think-tank-gathering-former-extremists-to-battle-radicalization/2011/06/22/AGZIW0iH_story.html?hpid=z3
    A think/do tank that is gathering gang members and radicals of all stripes with academics…under the leadership of a former state dept aide.
    Can technology de-radicalize the radicals? And if so, can google monetize it??!!!!!
    Maybe, perhaps, they’ll have Pape show up? And maybe they’ll trace incursions and territorialism to the process, and maybe they’ll read The Warmth of Other Suns which seems to have some insight into some of the more general issues surrounding radicalization.
    And maybe they’ll taxonomize as there might be some very significant differences between varieties of radical experience.
    And maybe they’ll look at religion and at tech geeks and at the variety of life experiences that freak us out enough that we take action to defend what we have as we fight to avoid losing status.
    Maybe someone will finally explain what “kids these days” means!

    Reply

  4. questions says:

    Pareene!!!!!!!!
    h/t Thoma:
    http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3217
    On Obama’s use of the first person singular pronoun and the conservative meme that he’s disgustingly self-referential. Someone thought to count. Really interesting. And the reader comments are also interesting.
    *
    Food fight between Yves Smith and Ezra Klein. One commenter seems to have gotten it right. Everyone else smushes Klein.
    *
    Thoma was busy last night reading! His links are fabulous. And Smith has something up regarding Type 2 diabetes and a harsh 8 week low cal diet as a way to “cure” it. Apparently, if you reduce calories enough for long enough, the fat in your pancreas goes away and so does Type 2. Early in the research, and a really tough diet to stick to (pretty much no food for 8 weeks — diet smoothies and arugula or something.) But interesting nonetheless.
    *
    More on Georgia and farm worker shortages in the wake of the immigration crackdown. Smith, I think.
    *
    NJ will crush public unions.
    *
    Supreme Ct. may or may not be right about Rx privacy and labels changes for generics. The issues seem more complex than the headlines suggest. Which is why, probably, the votes went as they did.
    *
    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-06/ps-htn062311.php
    h/t Thoma — race to the top or race to the bottom — high tech or low wages — which is better for the state? Hmmm.
    *
    Rortybomb:
    http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/demos-on-credit-reporting-and-employment-surveillance-inequalities-and-the-labor-market/
    Lots of our data will be used against us. This is kind of problematic. And it gets to the heart of the kind of shaming we’re prone to when we can’t quite decide where public and private, transparent and opaque, boundaries should be. We all do all sorts of things that we all know we all do but we don’t all “know” we all do. And this doubling of “knowing” is the source of our problems.
    What Weiner did is pretty common. Unpaid bills are pretty common. Bush’s drug use, again pretty common. But each one of these — sex, money and drugs, ends up being something of a shaming moment despite it all.
    I suppose we’ll work through this one too.
    It all fits in nicely with The Warmth of Other Suns — truly an amazing book! And there are all sorts of collective action moments, private shaming moments, refusals to be shamed ever again only to bump into more of it. Histories lost and found, reputations the move with you or are left behind. Lots of parallels to think through.
    *
    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/06/what-lessons-from-the-little-depression.html
    DeLong working with the same Ezra Klein material as Smith. Very interesting takes on things.
    I think one of the “coulda shoulda woulda” issues is that a lot of people might well have known that real estate was overpriced. In my own small way, even I had a sense of that. But to know real estate was overpriced is not at all to have predicted the precise nature of the bust.
    So those who say we did know, or people did know, maybe they didn’t know what they claim?
    There are all sorts of funny things you can do with the word “know” and lots of analytic philosophers play with this term. Never found it particularly interesting, but here is a place where “know” is far odder than one might have thought in advance.
    DeLong has an honest list of the things one needed to have known in order to have been able to predict. The honesty is very good, as is the self-effacement.
    *
    h/t DeLong, Krugman:
    http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/6668
    Krugman returns to his economist’s lament over instability and the inability to wall off techno econ from the policy process. I think it’s probably important to keep politics involved in economics because otherwise we’re inviting a tyranny. But then, politics is full of resentment and stickiness and foolishness and self-dealing corruption…. Yikes. Still and all, we’re probably better off having input into things, even if the cost is the labor mess in Georgia, the disasters in WI, FL, MI, ME, IN, AZ, NJ, and wherever else Republican guvs and legislatures have done really dumb stuff.
    We’ll pay and pay and pay. We’ll lose a generation or two. There will be suffering, loss of growth and infrastructure, kleptocracy, and other forms of corruption and bad governance. But at least we’re doing this all to ourselves by voting for Republicans, or failing to show up at the polls because Obama is insufficiently progressive on some issues dear to us.
    Maybe the political/policy market will self correct in the recalls and the next election, and the worst of the Tea Party/corporatocracy will burn itself out. And maybe not.
    *
    And DeLong asks why we’re not using TARP money to do infrastructure bank capitalization. It’s an interesting question. I get the feeling there’s a lot of policy-minded distrust of infrastructure projects because of some very real implementation problems. Pitting political boundaries against one another, building really useless crapola, playing into pay-to-play at the local level, paying for building stuff that would have been built anyway…all of this looks insurmountable from DC. And it might be insurmountable.
    Remember, Obama is very much a Chicago market dude with a heavy dose of market failure/behavioral econ sensibility. The market is a good thing for gathering local information about what is worth doing or not, how much to charge or spend…. Of course, it screws up regularly, too! But if you lean a little towards the markets, and if you’ve witnessed a fair number of bridges to nowhere and roads to sprawl, you do wonder if you can have a system that judges well what is to be done.
    And so we do nothing, and wait for our genius billionaires to fix it all for us.
    What does google invest in? Gates? The Waltons? The Kochs?
    They aren’t out there unrusting bridges, building light rail, or tuckpointing schools. So why should we? I suppose this is the thinking.
    Probably it’s not great thinking.
    Probably DeLong et al should help write bakers’ dozen lists of things that are worth doing with the US infrastructure bank, along with a project-choosing algorithm, and a vetting process, and all the rest of the stuff that goes into public spending. Then the admin would have something to work with.

    Reply

  5. questions says:

    Jared Bernstein does not like repatriation at a discount. He’s probably right:
    http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/tax-repatriation-you-can%E2%80%99t-turn-this-into-a-good-idea/
    But is there a way to force the capital into an infrastructure bank for a lengthy term of service? Would that act differently from the 5% rate or whatever people are tossing around?
    I can see the moral hazard issues of repatriation at a steep discount and that’s that. But there are perhaps other ways to get a fistful of dollars into the hands of regular people.

    Reply

  6. questions says:

    “The temporary tax break on foreign profits would likely provide a boon to federal coffers in the immediate term. If multinationals brought home $1 trillion, for example, the Treasury would collect $50 billion, precisely what President Obama proposed spending on an infrastructure bank last fall.”
    http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/21/schumer-adds-new-weight-to-repatriation-tax-talks/
    What if it’s not the tax receipts that go to the infrastructure bank, but rather the actual money — that is, to get the tax deal, you have to park the money in the infrastructure bank for n years, where n is a reasonable number determined by reasonable economists.
    Parked in a bank, but onshore, parked in a bank, but earning profits, parked in a bank and SAFE, parked in a bank and helping rebuild the domestic clientele of whatever companies are onshoring the money.
    A tax break and some investment income together at last?

    Reply

  7. questions says:

    Jared Bernstein:
    “#4: So, given #1, once these properties foreclose (or even when they

    Reply

  8. questions says:

    (odd error message — submitted twice, sorry if unnecessary)
    Two old trends that are new again!
    Adjustable rate mortgages are BAAACK!!!!
    http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/borrowers-wade-back-into-adjustable-rate-mortgages/?hp
    “Consider a borrower with good credit who needs a $200,000 mortgage. A 30-year fixed mortgage will carry a rate of about 4.49 percent, which translates into a $1,102 monthly payment. But the borrower could save about $128 each month by taking out a 5/1 ARM with a 3.375 percent rate, which translates into a payment of $884 per month. Over five years, that

    Reply

  9. questions says:

    Two old trends that are new again!
    Adjustable rate mortgages are BAAACK!!!!
    http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/borrowers-wade-back-into-adjustable-rate-mortgages/?hp
    “Consider a borrower with good credit who needs a $200,000 mortgage. A 30-year fixed mortgage will carry a rate of about 4.49 percent, which translates into a $1,102 monthly payment. But the borrower could save about $128 each month by taking out a 5/1 ARM with a 3.375 percent rate, which translates into a payment of $884 per month. Over five years, that

    Reply

  10. questions says:

    WaPo piece on London’s low income residents and the subsidies they get:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/londons-poor-facing-squeeze-amid-housing-benefit-cuts/2011/06/16/AGA37adH_story.html?hpid=z2
    Seems that the subsidies are very generous and allow for class mixing like the US would never tolerate. Almost as if the low income people are, I dunno, people, I guess. And people shouldn’t be stuck in ghettos perhaps.
    But it’s all changing. There’s no money for subsidies, there are plenty of internationally insanely rich people who can take their places, so the tonier neighborhoods of London will be turned over to the wealthy of the world, and London’s own low income residents will be removed, desubsidized, and made more like Americans. See, everyone does want to be just like us!
    Seriously, though, it’s interesting to see how differently low income people can be treated by different societies whose flash points are different. And it’s interesting to see how it can all change very quickly.
    It’s also interesting to wonder who’s supposed to benefit from rental subsidies — the poor, or the landlords, shopkeepers in neighborhoods or the kids whose schooling might be more stable. It’s also interesting to see what happens when we try to deconcentrate poverty to some extent. It costs immediate money, but there might be long term benefits, and there might be greater social stability.
    ****
    Huntsman and Perry are throwing hats in the ring. Is this the new, serious GOP? Grown ups, only?
    Rick Perry. Wow.
    *****
    Pareene!
    ****
    Obama is reportedly going to remove 30k soldiers from Afghanistan. The military wanted fewer cuts (maybe) and the left wants bigger cuts. There’s room for bringing home more people before the elections.
    **
    The budget stuff goes on and on. I am hopeful that whatever cuts they put in (and they will cut), they delay enough that maybe a few people will have jobs before the next round of RIFing.
    When our politics interfere to our detriment with out economics, when our metaphors are all wrong, when our various factions can’t get cooperative agreements going, when the prisoner’s dilemma rules us, when our rhetoric leads the way, we’re not in great shape.
    That is why it’s nice to see the Republicans growing up and not using insane rhetoric in their campaigns. (end snark)
    ****
    h/t Thoma:
    http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/libertarianism-and-tamerlane-principle.html
    Tamerlane, rampages, libertarianism. Not an argument I had thought of, but certainly one more tool in the anti-libertarian bucket. We need everything we can get because libertarianism resonates as a metaphor the same way budget nonsense does, and many other social instincts that turn out to be completely wrong.
    ****
    And more Thoma:
    http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-news/blog/maximum-utility/the-economy-temporary-soft-patch-or-reduced-momentum/1441/
    and bonddad:
    http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-are-markets-telling-us_21.html
    *****
    Monkey cage writer on tax receipts:
    http://today.yougov.com/news/2011/06/20/effects-tax-receipt/
    The receipt program seems not to have convinced many people that taxes are anything aside from what they already thought taxes were. The limits of information’s ability to change minds might be rearing its head.

    Reply

  11. aviv says:

    I have a bumper sticker that says Obama 44. The reference, of course, is to the fact that he is the 44th president. In a Home Depot parking lot in Jacksonville, a guy driving a new Ford F-150 said “I assume that means .44 cal,” inferring contempt for Obama. I said “I suppose I am the only person in this parking lot who supports Obama, but ultimately we are all Americans.” It gave him pause, and then he said, “Yes, we are.” Somehow we have to get beyond Fox, beyond the campaign strategy Nixon set in motion, and beyond the notion of the absolute sanctity of personal beliefs that deny other people human worth.

    Reply

  12. Carroll says:

    Can We Remain United?
    NO, we are already Not united.
    Ethnic politics, special interest groups, bought politicians and a dumbed down me-me population = say goodbye the late great USA.
    Pefect example of how it works:
    USA.http://forward.com/articles/138846/
    Jews and Latinos agree that Jews will push immigration amnesty for Latinos and Latinos will push Israel for Jews.
    What is going to be ironic is when all the various ‘groups’ take their bite out of America, the power of America and everything about it that atracted them and made it possible for them to use it will no longer exist.

    Reply

  13. David says:

    Have to agree with Kathleen. Also, have just returned to teaching (as a substitute – full time in the fall working with ESE students), and after an absence from the classroom of several years, two observations: we are in serious trouble, and if we do not find common ground and common purpose, we are well and truly screwed.
    I understand some aspects of the polarization. The ideologues, especially the sectarian ideologues, see evil in gays, humanists, “liberals,” and anyone who is not “saved,” and they have become a formidable political force. They cannot abide hard science when it conflicts with their belief systems, a problem I do not remember among churchgoers in my youth half a century ago. “God is a Republican” has become part of our social fabric. “Liberalism is the cause of all our ills” rolls off of too many people’s tongues too easily. And on my side of the divide, it is not easy to listen to some of the things those on the other side embrace. Dearly beloved cousins support “Greater Israel” as part of “God’s plan” – several cousins. Florida Republicans are hell bent to disenfranchise as many black Florida voters as possible before 2012, using changes in the election laws that eliminate aspects of early voting that have proved beneficial to black voters. How am I not supposed to feel contempt for the Florida Republican machine, which feels contempt for me because I am a liberal rational humanist? And how do we contend with the growing anti-intellectualism which pervades this society, a society obsessed with the “dangers of Muslims and immigrants,” both of whom are key contributors to the possibility of a healthy American society?
    I am anything but optimistic about either the intellectual development of our students or a reuniting of society around the safe communities of small-town America and the intellectual and artistic robustness of our centers of art and education (wherever they happen to be).
    As what might seem an insignificant aside, I remember being deeply annoyed by a bbq ad for a Texas bbq sauce that made fun of the idea of bbq sauce from New York City. Having lived there, I am willing to bet that somewhere in the Big Apple is the best bbq on the face of the earth, but my point is that a national advertisement would exploit this kind of polarization. This wasn’t about pride of product, this was about us v. them. I hate it.
    I also hate the car ads in which children are disrespectful toward their parents. Actually, I am essentially appalled by the changes in public attitudes, general mores, and the polarization that ignores or denies what unites us as American citizens.
    I have a bumper sticker that says Obama 44. The reference, of course, is to the fact that he is the 44th president. In a Home Depot parking lot in Jacksonville, a guy driving a new Ford F-150 said “I assume that means .44 cal,” inferring contempt for Obama. I said “I suppose I am the only person in this parking lot who supports Obama, but ultimately we are all Americans.” It gave him pause, and then he said, “Yes, we are.” Somehow we have to get beyond Fox, beyond the campaign strategy Nixon set in motion, and beyond the notion of the absolute sanctity of personal beliefs that deny other people human worth.
    We will stand or fall as a civil body politic, not as a collection of enclaves.

    Reply

  14. questions says:

    Not only are we divided in various ways interpersonally, but also intra-personally:
    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-newlatinosouth-farmworkers-story,0,3768292.htmlstory
    It’s hard out there to be a farmer who can only pay low wages in the south to handpick blackberries, in the south where anti-immigration law is king. The article focuses on Georgia.
    If we pay a decent wage, and if we can even find the workers to do the field work, we might not be able to afford blackberries.
    So the very people who vote in the Republicans to exile the immigrant workers in order to “save” jobs will no longer have the same access to food without paying a whole lot more. And if the workers can’t be found at any acceptable wage at all, then the food will simply stop being available from domestic sources.
    So do you choose yourself as an anti-immigration activist, or do you choose yourself as a consumer of food? Do you start to see the need for comprehensive immigration reform? Is Obama’s crackdown via ICE designed to get us to see how much we really need reform, or is it designed to make Republicans happy?
    And how should we choose on this issue? For a choice must be made.
    The article concludes thus:
    “A week later, another small cohort of blacks and whites would show for work

    Reply

  15. questions says:

    Well, clearly, unions are the problem…. Check out this factoid from the WaPo’s entrance into the class war:
    “This trend held at Dean Foods. Over the period from the

    Reply

  16. Kathleen says:

    Having one of the Supreme Court Judges who voted to stop the recount in Florida which brought us the Bush administration via a Supreme Court Judicial coup saying “come together” is absurd. She was and integral part of the partisan 2000 Supreme Court Presidential selection.

    Reply

  17. brigid says:

    It’s hard to replicate an entire nation watching Walter Cronkite or Huntley-Brinkley in the early evening. Getting pounded with Fox News and right or left wing opinion media is not going to build community. It didn’t help the situation when Sandra Day O’Connor turned over the Supreme Court to a group of extremists. If there is a consensus to be had it is with the younger generations, and whatever new media they can come up with that will build bridges. If political discussions focused on policy solutions rather than identity and ideology, consensus would be found. Polling shows a majority of Americans want their Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security,pragmatic foreign policy, and a middle path solution on immigration. But as long as culture wars are waged, and wedge politics, Americans are going to be at war with each other.

    Reply

  18. Kathleen says:

    “Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who opened the conference with a short speech, quipped that the best way to overcome divisions within the U.S. is to “get everybody together…and sit around outside and eat Mexican food and drink beer and make friends with each other. That worked.” Despite the refreshing honesty and simplicity of O’Connor’s advice,”
    This type of advice coming from one of the biased partisan Supreme Court Judges who was part of a Supreme Court Presidential selection in 2000..a Judicial coup is nauseating. O’Connor is attempting to rewrite her sordid vote by trying to bring people together. That vote tore this nation and our constitution to threads. The US supreme court stopped the recount. If they had wanted to do the best thing for the country..they should have found a way to require Florida to recount the whole states votes. They did not. Their biased votes catapulted this nation into 8 years of disaster.
    I was able to get into the Bush Vs Gore Supreme Court hearing.
    If O’Connor wants to redeem herself…she would grow the balls, nerve, backbone to admit that she made a very serious mistake

    Reply

  19. questions says:

    It’s catching on…..
    “Why doesn

    Reply

  20. questions says:

    Can’t we all just get along…..
    Some guy was pulled off a US Air flight for sagging.
    Good lord.
    Would they pull a plumber off for bending over to pick something up?
    If a flight attendant can’t deal with sagging……
    http://www.salon.com/wires/sports/06/16/D9NSTNJO0_us_saggy_pants_arrest/

    Reply

  21. Dogzilla says:

    “…get everybody together…and sit around outside and eat Mexican food and drink beer and make friends with each other. That worked.”
    Howzabout a national service? Nothing creates bonds between disparate peoples like organized, shared, misery.

    Reply

  22. Victoria Love says:

    Considering the fact that Sandra Day O’Connor dished up and served the United States smothered in guacamole and pico on a big platter to Karl Rove, I don’t particularly care about her opinion on getting us all together. That beer has been quaffed.

    Reply

  23. paul lukasiak says:

    isn’t the real question “Should the United States remain united”?
    Lets face it — most Americans (and the rest of the world) would be far better off if we divided up the country in a way that makes sense politically. The Northeast and the Rust Belt could be one nation, the South another, the “farm/desert” states another, and the West Coast a fourth.
    I’m personally sick and tired of our political fates being decided by a bunch of red necks in the south and from the mountain time zone. Lets split it up.

    Reply

  24. questions says:

    (Should be “Pariser” throughout)
    I’d recommend a look at Beverly Daniel Tatum’s book Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? as a first walk through this issue. It’s been around for a while in various guises.
    Before we had internet sorting, we had regional and neighborhood and table sorting. We had newspapers called “The Democrat”, and clearly labeled liberal or conservative press. We have had class sorting for forever and a day.
    Sorting seems to make a lot of people feel far more comfortable, far less on edge, and more able to be themselves than we might really like to admit. “High diversity, low trust societies” is not a phrase I made up all by myself.
    There are gestures, accents, food choices, word and humor choices, personal space choices, and huge numbers of other variants that keep us doing the sorting. Empires come together and blow up again and again, political parties shift and sort and mix and do it all over again.
    There is still a lot of room for odd bedfellows despite all the sorting, and we may be a little less sorted than we think. After all, conservatives do seem to know the liberal positions, and they do seem to know how dumb anything a liberal would ever want to do actually is. And vice versa. And, honestly, what is so “liberal” or “conservative” about the debt limit vote? Much less falls on party lines than it would seem, and so the sorting isn’t entirely consistent. As inconsistent, then, it’s unstable. And as unstable, it’s likely to breakdown pretty routinely. Which it does.
    Sorting works until it doesn’t and then we remix.
    Read the NYT piece today on trying to figure out which race box to check on college applications. Plenty of mixing is indicated.
    There was a recent report on a backwards migration of African Americans to the south after so many years of migration north. Everyone has a family member in another party, and that family member hears plenty!
    I wouldn’t think we’re in quite a hermetically sealed bubble so much as we already have some leanings that we like.
    Jon Stewart exposes liberals to clips from conservatives, even if it’s only to mock, and so liberals do indeed hear the conservative view point. If you ever read comments about Stewart, you see that people don’t always agree with his mocking. People do have critical judgment, and so aren’t merely “sheeple” (“sheople”?)
    All the same, Sunstein’s Why Societies Need Dissent suggests that it’s a good idea to hear challenges to your views. I get the feeling that aside from very artificial situations like juries and appellate panels, people really do hear at least some strains of the voices of others.
    Mostly, though, we’d just like to be comfortable for a while, and a mono-culture cafeteria table is a little easier on the brain than is one with people from the other party, when you know you’re going to get into one of those arguments….. Is it possible we fight more and hate more when we have to spend time with them when we’re just not up for it? What would our use of blood pressure meds be like if we had to read news from the other side?!!

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *