Out of the "Mainstream" (Yes, again)

Long-term friends on Facebook my have noticed that on many days of late I have not posted a 'suggested read' ("My Morning Read") -- or that if I have posted one it was focused less on the political and more on a broader philosophical or historical subject. And along with this change some may have noticed that I've not been having pieces posted by the internet 'journals' that have regularly posted my writings in the past.

All of this is true -- and all of it is related.  For of late I have been seeing on the so-called (not aptly named in my opinion) "conservative side" a tendency toward bias -- one that in some ways parallels what has long been seen on the (also in my opinion poorly named) "liberal" side. -That is a turning away from balanced open reason and argument towards such that is carefully strictured and one-sided.  That is, by way of a musical analogy, that 'chorus voices' are welcome - but that individual voices are not.  That singing 'louder' than others is approved of (and even encouraged), but the tune being sung has to be exactly  'note for note (with the 'score' provided) and don't even think about changing the words.

Whether my separating myself from this -- my withdrawing and pulling away -- is for better or for worse my friends and other 'readers' can decide for themselves, but such is, and always has been, my way.  I'm just not a 'chorus' singer.

Those who have known me well for years likely are little surprised by this.  I was the same as a young person -- and that to the chagrin of my parents (well my dad, anyway) and teachers.  A film student with a commonly thought promising career -- one who was working in the field even before college graduation -- I in short term left the field entirely when I discovered its business ethics did not match my own. And that decision having been made I then directed my 'gifts' such as they were entirely elsewhere.

And so it is, perhaps for a time at least, now.

In this case it did not happen all at once. -First I found my submitted articles were being gently edited to stress more 'acceptable' points of view while softening or removing others. Then submitted pieces were sent back to me for rewrites (which generally were not forthcoming). And finally, when my thinking more and more clearly diverged for that of the editors, such were rejected entirely.  ('It goes no place' I was told -- when in fact it most surely did. -Just not in the currently 'approved' direction.)

My conclusion was a simple one: So be it.

In very brief, this is where I stand:

Now is not the time for intentional divisiveness. It is a time to find common goals toward a common good. Not through compromise of ideals, but through a found common purpose.

What is always true in general is especially true today: That there are good arguments to be made on not just both sides of a central argument, but on all sides.  And this includes on finding the ever changing balance between "freedom" and "responsibility."

That every argument made against "our side" (a distinction I personally do not always clearly see) is not necessarily made with a poor or hidden motive. Hindsight has ever shown this to be so. Shouldn't we thus allow ourselves to see it with foresight?

"Hurray for our team!" is not in itself an argument. Indeed such exclamations can easily drown out an argument.

That corruption does exist and, yes, must in time be dealt with.  But that "investigating" and "punishing" others -- even those who in the end deserve such -- is not always the 'at the moment' most important thing.  As has been said before: 'Fix the problem, not the blame."

So once again I find myself out, not only of the "mainstream," but in truth of any large flowing 'stream' at all -- maybe even that which is comfortably carrying along my friends.

And so again I say -- indeed, I must say: So be it.

For how long?   Who knows?

-