> Why can't we all just get along?
>
>Tim Ryan


We are. This is what getting along really looks like, Tim, where everyone
gets a chance to say something. We're getting along because we're talking
about it.

Note how most messages in this little bayou of a side topic have stuck to
the issue, though some beg the question ("We shouldn't talk about this
here, what does it have to do with birds, etc.") and others attack the
individual ("Joe Meche is Elitist" - which he is, but he's very very nice
about it). This note will also attract a few such remarks, by which time
I'll be out looking at shorebirds in Blaine.

It may look like people are at war because informed dissent these days is
becoming a lost art. Our culture is currently dominated by an anti-liberal
veneer centered in commercial religion and secondarily in religiously
dominated politics. Authorities in both tend to react to disagreement as if
it were a personal attack. It's all about power, and authorities don't like
sharing it. That's why they're in authority. Ask a question of one of them
these days and you're as likely to get arrested, ignored or shouted down as
taken seriously or welcomed into a civil debate on the issue. What this has
to do with birds is that the loyal followers of such diversity-intolerant
control freaks often are seen in parades doing the goose-step.

In birding, or bird-watching (some of us old guys still wince at that word
change), things are hopefully more democratic (as in most sciences when
compared to religion or politics). Ideally, everyone gets to contribute,
and disagreements are welcomed as opportunities to consider, discuss,
debate (even vigorously) and perhaps learn something. A healthy respect for
those with whom you disagree and a willingness to learn from them is key.
Of course there are exceptions, some by well known scientists like Edward
Teller. But the last thing we'd want is to shut off discussion even when it
gets a little heated. It's like the discussions you have going and coming
from a birding site, some of which seem like an attempt to imitate the
birds as much as talk about them.

As long as people stick to the issue, discussions can and should be lively
and even a little loud. Otherwise we're just competing with each other to
agree with some central authoritarian figure, and dissension is quashed.

Politics haven't always been like that. As the liberal Democrat Stewart
Udall said when he ran very hard for president only to loose badly in the
primaries, "The people have spoken, the bastards."





Jack Kintner <jack.kintner at verizon.net> Blaine