tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post6923768847874999060..comments2024-03-28T16:31:23.093-07:00Comments on Books in Northport: A New Kind of RadicalismP. J. Grathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12693462910472164289noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-52482498391482350982019-04-14T18:36:23.352-07:002019-04-14T18:36:23.352-07:00Jeanie, I think our minds are following similar pa...Jeanie, I think our minds are following similar paths in response to these stories. You point out that immediate issues were of extreme importance to everyone involved in the MP Group and that they shared values and agreed on issues that needed to be addressed, which is what I was trying to say when I wrote that the issues were not abstract to area residents. It’s interesting that you mention immigration and global warning as issues lacking similar shared starting points. I would also say that the issues remain, for many Americans, abstract issues. I read somewhere that people with the greatest fear of foreigners are often those farthest from the borders of their own country, which also reminds me that many years ago a friend who had been living abroad was afraid to come home because she read so much in the news about random acts of violence in the U.S. Living intimately with a situation — as do both Americans and Mexicans who live along the U.S./Mexican border and cross back and forth often to shop, visit family, etc. — or, in the case of climate change, residents of small islands or low-lying coastal cities — is very different from a long-distance, uninvolved view. And you are absolutely right, I think, about all the roaring and the difficulty of taming that into a conversation. This is why I suggested that it might not be worth the time to try to hash out differences if it’s only a matter of disagreement. It’s when everyone agreeds that something needs to be done and they can articulate an end goal that it will probably be worthwhile trying to figure out how to get there together. <br /><br />The MBG has not permanently vanquished all its dragons, by any means. What author Nathan Sayre calls a “tsunami of capital” is not going to give up attempts to turn ranches into new home-building sites that can be sold for enormous profits. I’d vote for ranches and wilderness, but I am not rich enough to make a big difference. All I can do is help to spread the word. When it comes to the larger issues like immigration and climate change, I think what we can do is break them down into pieces, smaller issues more easily and and practically addressed. Re-usable shopping bags. Re-usable (rather than recyclable) milk bottles. Small agenda items good for all of us. Well, that’s climate change. I have to admit that while I’ve been reading and thinking about immigration for several years, it’s hard for me to see what kind of national policy would be fair, just, and workable for all concerned. Can we break this large issue down into pieces, too? <br /><br />Thank you, Jeanie, for pushing MY thought further!P. J. Grathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12693462910472164289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-45664199173946499222019-04-14T16:56:57.092-07:002019-04-14T16:56:57.092-07:00This MGB group and your comments brought some real...This MGB group and your comments brought some real hard questions to my mind. Their shared goals and serious conversations with ranchers and others about the future of the west are very inspiring. It sounds like they might make an impact, that they will find a way forward for all involved. The leap in using this consensuel approach for societal, divisive issues made me think. The passion and desire for MGB people to try for resolution made sense with ranchers and others because it was of extreme importance to all sides. I’m not sure that immigration or global warming have a shared idea or value or a central issue that could be a starting point for an unheated conversation. I hope that someday we CAN get to a point of valid discussion, but these issues are so many-sided and shaded with misinformation, at least from what I can see. People are denying and misrepresenting parts of the issues. Where can you go? It reminds me of Hitchens’ Orwell quote about the war in Catalonia because no one would ever know what really happened. The societal issues nowadays of importance seem to be many-headed dragons where each head is roaring and not ready to be tamed into a conversation. Gee, this sounds critical, but I am glad that you made me think! Jeanie Furlanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16294566547596358943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-1192353497240252512019-04-11T10:32:37.174-07:002019-04-11T10:32:37.174-07:00Valerie, thanks -- but don't hold your breath!...Valerie, thanks -- but don't hold your breath!P. J. Grathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12693462910472164289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-50735715055038467192019-04-11T09:27:44.314-07:002019-04-11T09:27:44.314-07:00I agree that you're writing a book! Many of u...I agree that you're writing a book! Many of us are waiting to read it.Valerienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-42269942557231741412019-04-10T07:11:30.551-07:002019-04-10T07:11:30.551-07:00Carla, you don’t know how happy I am to have your ...Carla, you don’t know how happy I am to have your comment. In fact, it prompted me to reflect further and add a lengthy postscript (see above) to what I posted earlier in the day. <br /><br />Here is my question for you: when you are dealing with church congregations in conflict, does it make a difference if there is a shared goal? Or is commonality itself sufficient as a goal, since presumably members of the same church already share so many beliefs and values? I’m wondering if discussions among members of a conflicted congregation need shared objectives — if they are problem-solving, as was the original Malpai discussion group — or if open, respectful conversation is the goal. Am I asking my question clearly? Do people in the congregation agree to disagree, and is that okay? Is it different when there is some proposed action on the table? You say “commonality not consensus,” but because the Malpai people had a big problem to solve, it was important for them to have consensus on any action plan. Different for churches? Sometimes? All the time?<br /><br />You and I are going to have a lot to talk about the next time we see each other! And of course I will read your book proposal. I am eager to read the book and want to see it published!<br />P. J. Grathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12693462910472164289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4130421352415377273.post-7640039514138228452019-04-09T14:32:35.831-07:002019-04-09T14:32:35.831-07:00Hi Pamela!
I loved your blog today. This use of &...<br />Hi Pamela!<br />I loved your blog today. This use of "coming together" is one we use often in churches in conflict. The need to listen to the "sides", and to help them to find commonality not concensus!<br />Hopefully this works as a win-win outcome, with most respecting and appreciating one another.<br /><br />We've been really working hard on our book, but it seems like two steps forward and one or two back!!!<br /><br />Anyway, maybe some day when we finally get it together, would you at least look over our proposal?<br /><br />Thanks, and It feels to me that you are getting ready to put forth a book. You are a thoughtful writer who has something to say!!<br /><br />Hi to the artist!<br />LOve, CarlaCarla Cunninghamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03959048576553448766noreply@blogger.com