Preaching to the choir

Not too many conservatives read this blog.  That doesn’t surprise me — I don’t read too many conservative blogs, either.



And that might be the problem.

An old friend commented to me the other day that a recent post wasn’t the best way to gain converts to my cause, given my sarcastic treatment of those on the right.  I replied that I never expected it to, as I didn’t see them as my target audience anyway.  (Seriously — if I were invited to do a guest blog on a conservative site, the tone and argument presented would be completely different.  I do know how to convince people who are not on my side.  I am a trial lawyer, after all.)

But he’s right about one thing:  While these posts may give me a chance to vent (“Hi, I’m Mike Vent Fella”), they’re not designed to be appreciated by those who disagree with me.

And that’s true all over the internet.  Liberals watch MSNBC which confirms the biases they already have, and conservatives watch Fox which confirms the prejudices and idiotic nonsense they believe.  (See?  I did it again.  I can’t help it.)

Is there a solution?  Probably not.  I don’t mind reading conservative commentary when it is reasonable, but too often, these conservative blogs are insulting and demeaning and I give up before I get too far.

Which is probably what conservatives think when they read mine.

3 thoughts on “Preaching to the choir

  1. Well said, Mike. I was running into the same thing on Facebook where I was using it as a place to vent and just dump rhetorical on the world. (I literally took the attitude that those who think like I do will get to read something they agree with and support, and those who don’t, well, they would be insulted, but I didn’t care because there is no hope for them anyway.)

    I don’t consider myself a conservative or a liberal, in fact I am a registered libertarian. (I believe in the freedoms that the liberals want and the freedoms that the conservatives want, but I dislike the rules and limitations that borh sides seem to want set for the rest of us.)

    I also agree that this seems to be the same all over the Internet.

    Personally, I have found that in person I can have very intelligent and articulate conversations with people on all sides of the various political fences, and we all can see a little bit of each other’s points, even if we don’t agree with each other on the whole.

    Where there is body language, tone of voice, and a little bit of empathy garnered from looking your counterpart in the eye, all seem to be much more reasonable.

    In a format where there is almost nothing but written forms of argument, such as blogs and Facebook with long comment strings of back-and-forth discussion (if you can even call it that) all of the listening, learning, understanding and mutual respect seems to go out the window and everyone just resorts to criticizing each other and people get angry or offended quickly, which further exasperates the situation.

    Maybe that’s why Congress has so many problems, too. When everything is being argued and decided by lawyers (not attacking the profession, just stating that many politicians are lawyers, and lawyers tend to work in writing first; empathic and meaningful communication through speech/tone and body language second, if at all) there’s no real intellectual conversation happening, rather only playing to win, and generally winning within the party lines.

    I don’t know how to make it better other then to minimize any debates that I might have in written form, and try to keep everything meaningful – and therefore discussed in person with all the tools of interpersonal communication available, and a willing and a general want to be reasonable to each other…

    …because, for me, in a written form, it all comes down to trying not to spend my life writing novels of political diatribe, yet always taking the stance that making the rules for me without my okay is not okay. (See? Writing is NOT a good way to discuss opposing views, as a single argument can blanket an entire subject without reasonable discussion.)

    Etc. etc. Rinse and repeat.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I think you underestimate the power of converting someone. Yes, your blog doesn’t convert a lot of conservatives, but the converts then convert other people.
    My friend didn’t believe in evolution until she watched the Bill Nye debate on youtube. When she became pro-evolution, I sent a huge stack of books I had saved(because they had evolution topics and she wouldn’t let her kids read them) to her kids. One of her kids is popular, Bill Nye is not the one loaning books on evolution to public school kids in Texas(and New Mexico). Bill Nye is not the one that convinced her mother and husband to accept evolution.
    Your sarcasm and logic is targeting one conservative per circle. By being able to attack the beliefs and not the person(which is rare and, on the internet, nearly non-existent) you are converting one domino.

    Plus, I send Texas rednecks to your blog when there is an odd legal thing because you actually know the answer and can do more than regurgitate the legalese. At the very least, you are reducing the number of angry rednecks ranting about constitutional violations.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s