> It's basically impossible to change urban design here.
Is it? It's not that long ago that highways were driven intentionally through Black neighborhoods [1]. What humans can do they can also undo, all it needs is politicians with guts.
Is it really possible that half the country (or more, according to latest polls) are bat crazy?
Is it possible that you are getting information from news sources and thinkers that are biased and reflect one storyline; while the other half of the country gets their facts and forms their opinions from sources that are biased the other way and reflect a different story-line?
Which makes you think they have gone off the kilter and have no logic, and makes them think the exact same thing about you.
I mostly headlines from RCP, BUT I make a point of reading both CNN and FOX, while assuming BOTH are bald faced liars. Between the two I can at least hope to get a little balance, and ferret out a few possible facts.
Any conversation is good if not done in bad faith, and I always assume good faith. Amazing what you can learn that way, and even more amazing how much progress can be made in local politics.
Someone once told me "Fight for your views, and don't back down from anyone. And always remember, you might even be correct." :D
A good politician is one who can say across the aisle, "Did you vote for Trump out of rabid-red-and-orange, or are you trying to accomplish something? Maybe there is a way to accomplish that in a way that makes us both happy."
Don't assume this is naive; I have had cause to be somewhat involved in local politics. And, sure, you need showmanship, but sincerely looking for solutions actually works.
> Is it possible that you are getting information from news sources and thinkers that are biased and reflect one storyline; while the other half of the country gets their facts and forms their opinions from sources that are biased the other way and reflect a different story-line?
The thing is, everyone can judge the "facts" that these people consume and see for their own that a lot of what Fox News et al. distribute to their consumers is outright propaganda and lies. Tucker Carlson infamously got away with the excuse that a viewer should be able to recognize him "not stating actual facts" [1], even though a large part of his following seems to be either unable to or unwilling to see through the lies.
In Germany, TV and radio stations as well as newspapers are bound by the law to "independent and factual" reporting, as well as to check the stuff they broadcast if it actually is true (§6/§19 MStV [2]). Obviously, we still have issues with the tabloids sometimes stretching the truth a bit, but in general it can be said that our media follows the responsibility it has as a vital part of our democracy.
> Any conversation is good if not done in bad faith, and I always assume good faith.
While admirable, this inevitably comes crashing down hard when enemy propaganda comes into the mix - both domestic and foreign, in particular Russian. When one side is known for "assuming good faith", an enemy has it very easy to apply disinformation tactics... and for what it's worth, the West has been at war with Russia for many years now, even though many people refused to admit that.
Seriously, anyone who gets their news from the media is trusting someone else's bias AND incompetence, despite us humans being extremely good at hearing only what we want to hear, and subconsciously transforming anything into whatever will support our preferred narrative.
A little work in politics and you will be shocked how far removed any given statement of a politician is from his objectives. "Lets block Russian Oil" could mean "this way we have an excuse for the high gas prices", or it could mean "this way it looks we are doing something" or it could mean "we have been on the phone with Putin, and he promised not to nuke Kiev if we give him a way to save face. This will be renegotiated soon" or many other things that involve many other countries, characters, and calculations. You can read about the sanction and jump to your preferred conclusion, or you can let the media guide you to their preferred jump, but either will guide you wrong if you think you understand the decision without all the relevant facts.
It says something about the state of media or the calibration of right/left these days that The Wall Street Journal is not considered a right wing source.
It says something even more that CNN, MSNBC, and the NYT are considered "left". Sensationalism capitalizing on division isn't "left". It's just modern capitalism in disguise.
Vox is a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, which is a right-of-center political operation.
The US doesn't have a left-wing with any voice or power. The overwhelming majority of the country are right-wing or far right-wing.
CNN, MSNBC and NYT are definitely not left-wing news sources. At best, if we're being extremely charitable, they are centrist. There is no left wing media in the US.
Is it? It's not that long ago that highways were driven intentionally through Black neighborhoods [1]. What humans can do they can also undo, all it needs is politicians with guts.
[1]: https://www.npr.org/2021/04/07/984784455/a-brief-history-of-...