An excuse to get political

So this post will not be so much a discussion ABOUT the topic of ADHD, rather it is more of an example. In the post on overthinking, I tried to give some context on how seemingly trivial things will get stuck in my head and distract me from more important thoughts. This, on the other hand, will be an example where overthinking can serve to improve my perspective and think about something in a way most people won't. 

If you've read a few of my posts so far, you might have recognized the main result of overthinking is defining terms. It's not enough to say x is good or bad. What am I really considering as x? When I say good or bad, do I mean good for me, bad for society, or maybe for the planet? Am I considering laws or morals or societal standards? Nothing is ever simple and has to be properly defined. On the one hand, every topic is more complicated than most people are willing to discuss with me. On the other hand, I think it allows me to more easily find common views with people who at a glance seem to have very different views from me. 

Murder is bad. That shouldn't be 'political' Sure, I mean obviously, but death sentences for serial killers? Eh, now we're getting into grey areas. So I might not like death as punishment but I might talk to someone who has a family member murdered and wants to see justice done. How do I find common ground there? I define the terms. Murder I consider as unnecessary killing with intent.

 Killing means taking life, not good. We can both easily agree on that, but not good doesn't mean it is never worth doing. It's just not the desired outcome. If the desired outcome is their family member never got murdered, then we wouldn't NEED to decide whether to punish the killer with death or not. So already we've moved from opposing sides to agreeing that death is not the best option, and the need for punishment itself leads to the root of the actual issue. Then we can agree that poverty leads to higher crime and maybe needs for greater social assistance to reduce poverty, and better mental health resources to prevent troubled individuals from deciding to murder. 

So on and so forth, we can define and expand and so we have quite a lot in common, even if we don't agree on the full answer. So I want to increase this deeper form of discussion and want to remove the stigma of talking about something 'political'.

So what is 'political'? I think a lot of topics are labelled political because at the end of the day, the government, ergo the reigning political party, is in charge of defining and enforcing the policies that impact our daily lives, even if the topic itself is not of a political nature. As such, economics always gets thrown into politics as if it's something we don't have numbers and answers for. And some parts of economics are truly undefined at this point and deserve to be called political until further researched. But the bulk of 'political' topics ends up not actually being political in nature. 

There are, as I see it, 3 types of political topics. 

Truly political topics - hotly debated with no obvious right answer or multiple perspectives by which to measure being 'right'

Political in setting - Like a lot of economics, the topics are actually well defined and measurable with most questions having clear correct answers, but the topics are dealt with within the government and gets lumped in as politics

Forum politics - These are topics that may or may not actually be political, but in any case will be argued with passion by all involved. These are topics that tend to enflame people and don't often lead to productive discussion

Many topics discussed will be put in the political tag because everyone agrees on the destination, but not everyone agrees on the path. A good economy = better. But how do we get to a better economy? This often forms the bulk of political debate between parties. No party says they want a weak economy, but one side wants to stimulate growth with new investment, other side wants to save money and focus on existing industries. This mainly lands in the 2nd and 3rd categories. 

But the first category is where the truly political topic sits. And those are often not an argument on the path, but an argument on the destination itself. Abortion is an interesting example. No one wants MORE abortions, but some want to access and freedom of choice while some see it the same as murder and want it completely outlawed. That makes it very political in how it is debated. 

But within the group that wants access all agree less need is better, some want to make it harder to get, and some want to increase spending on preventative measures to reduce the overall need. So depending on the setting, this can sometimes be more about the path than the destination. But above all, It's almost always in 'Forum Politics' due to the very personal nature of talking about personal choice, children's lives, and killing in general. 

I'm terrible at conclusions but I think this gets very complicated and needs a good wrap-up, so I want to stress 2 points to take away.

One

When a topic seems too political to discuss, more thought needs to be put it. Ignoring the issues and intentionally continuing to close your mind to others' viewpoints is poisoning public discourse and increasing polarization among many topics that aren't even political. Define things, find common grounds and don't be afraid to talk to 'opposing' sides.

Two

Some things that are said to be political really aren't. Determine if it's actually debated much or if it's pretty cut and dry or factual. Figure out if it's only political because the government did it. And most of all don't be afraid to care about the world because it's 'political'. Often that's the thing we need to talk about the most. 

With love and insanity equally,

J.M.