Like the pragmatists, I favor an open democratic society (p. 32). I am wholly a political being; I was very close to applying to run for the congressional seat in my district this last winter. I still regret not completing the process because what would be the worst outcome? I'd lose. The race, perhaps. But not my self esteem or my view that as a society we are becoming less democratic and that a better way exists.
As the text notes, that democratic society would be one "in which a plurality of different views could be expressed, rather than a society of warring ideological factions" (p. 32). If I had won, would I have been any less warring in the battle for a more liberal society? I'm not sure. Regardless, I believe that we are losing the plurality of voices and strongly side with the pragmatists that we need all voices to be heard and not shouted down.
That may be perhaps the longest way possible of saying that I liked this chapter and what it has to say about how we engage in the ongoing dialogue in society. However, I also consider that this is not a dialogue that is contained to American society, rather, it's a global conversation. Our Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest, 4Square, Google+, etc. accounts are not contained strictly within the United States of America. In these forums, to the extent appropriate in each, I speak my mind, sometimes as an American, but more often, as a global citizen. To an extent, this is the "'social me,' which is the recognition we get from others" (p. 35). I add my voice to the global conversation, not for recognition, but for contribution. If someone recognizes that and wants to share it great, but it's not for my own self aggrandizement; every voice is needed to help move the process forward. Which process? Our process of being.
No comments:
Post a Comment