Thin
k of any contentious issue that has faced the city – the Northland Project, the marijuana referendum, NewCal, leaf blower, Austin St, Engine 6,….
Whenever I feel strongly about a particular position on a particular issue, the most frustrating part is being faced with a lot of people who can’t see the extremely obvious merits of whatever I think about the issue. Funny thing is though, there are a lot of people lined up on the other side of the issue that can’t believe that people like me can’t see the merits of their position.
We are fortunate enough to live in a city where the citizenry often gets very involved in the issues of the day. The downside though is that its very easy to slip in to shouting matches with both sides accusing the other of bad faith and nefarious motives,
I say this as someone with some first hand experience in that department. My first involvement in any public issue activity in Newton was about some trails along the river in my neighborhood about 8 years ago. At the time, my first instinct was to ascribe all sorts of incompetence, malfeasance, and malign motivations to folks on the other side of the issues involved there. To this day, there are a few things I said publicly back then that I wish I could now retract.
So going forward, both here on Village14, and in all public dealings on the issues of the day I try to keep reminding myself that virtually everyone I disagree with on different issues is also working for the betterment of the city. This goes for our fellow citizens as well as our elected officials. I’ve yet to meet one who wasn’t working hard in the interests of the city, despite the fact that we can often be completely in opposition on particular issues.
These ramblings were inspired by a chance meeting yesterday with an old friend. I live here in Upper Falls, ground-zero for the Northland project, and Right Size Newton’s opposition. While I’m a bit apprehensive about the scale of the Northland project, I’m also excited about the possibilities for the project to rejuvenate the neighborhood and rehabilitate some wasteland that’s sort of an eyesore. I’m frankly dead set against the upcoming referendum which will attempt to repeal Northland’s permitting for the project and I will continue to urge folks not to vote for it.
Despite that, running into my old friend reminded me that, in the big picture, we’re all on the same team. So here’s a heartfelt thanks to Right Size Newton for having our neighborhood’s interest at heart. Thanks for doing a great job of sparking the community involvement of so many people who haven’t previously been involved in civic affairs. Congratulations on an incredibly effective and efficient signature drive – 4000+ signatures in 20 days was pretty impressive.
I still hope your referendum question fails but I hope we work together on whatever the next big issue is. I hope too that Right Size folks realize that the people on the other side of the Northland project don’t have any malign interests, just different views of what’s in the best interest of all of us.
@Jerry – Thank you
Thanks, Jerry. As a former long time Burr School teacher, I know a lot of people who align themselves with RSN and while we don’t agree on this issue, we’re completely aligned on many others. We have lots to talk about, including how their kids/my former students are doing. It keeps it real.
@Jerry: very nice post. As an independent (conservative on some issues and liberal on others) I disagree with many things on the progressive agenda. That said, I have many lifelong friends who are die hard liberal progressives…..we go out for drinks, argue till we are blue in the face, and then hug each other at the end of the night and say we can’t wait until we get together again. The point is you can disagree vehemently with someone else’s position without villainizing the other person. I believe that is where politics these days has unfortunately become-a mud slinging contest in both sides.
Jerry thanks for posting this to remind us that we all want what is best for the city we live in but disagree on what that is or on how to go about making it happen. I agree that maintaining civility is key to having controversial discussions that don’t digress into name calling or making wild unsubstantiated claims about one side or the other. Like all humans – sometimes we agree and sometimes we don’t.
Jim,
I am not sure I understand you correctly here. Is your claim that you acknowledge when you or the Grand Old Party are in the wrong? Objectivity doesn’t exist, JE. The human mind, desires, fears, worries, ego, personal history, experiences, opinions, ideas, ideals, goals, etc make this impossible. You present your beliefs as invariably “true.” How can one have a conversation with someone of that mindset and hope for constructive debate? We don’t live in a world where every issue is black and white. You ask answers and engage heavily in self-preservation. If you truly believe in objectivity, then you should research how dramatically eye witness accounts differ and engage in a game of telephone. Play fair, Jim, we all fall into the same traps.
Jim’s last comment was removed because in addition to maligning a group of people without any proof, it does not follow the spirit of this thread which is maintaining civility when we disagree. Sorry Jason that you had already committed about what he said.
Marti,
I feel that my deleted comment was substantiated, but we can civilly disagree on that.
In keeping with the apparent spirit here, kumbaya.
Jim, I’m leaving this last comment up but only because Jerry took your bait and tried to explain why your comment maligned a group of people and explain how it could be done differently.
As Jerry says, any comment that starts off saying something negative about a group of people is generally subjective and doesn’t end with an objective fact – which includes yours. Not all members of a group think alike or do anything else alike so it’s impossible to substantiate a blatant statement about any large group of people. Now please move on.
Jim, yes I agree that there are indeed such things as provable object facts.
That said, pretty much any sentence that begins with “Conservatives are ….” or “Liberals are ….” does not often end with an objective fact.
Please, please don’t take that up as a challenge for the next comment though ;-)
We’ve all got plenty of things to disagree with each other about, and that’s fine, and useful.
The intent of this thread was to shake those disagreements off, at least for a few moments, to remember that for all of our disagreements we have way more in common than what keeps us apart.
Don’t worry, we will continue to have plenty of other threads where we can all try to convince each other of the rightness of our various causes, and the wrongness of our opponents. That after all, for better and worse, is the lifeblood of Village 14.
… and a hearty kumbaya to you too Jim ;-)
Thank you @Jerry. These are interesting times we live in, full of heated rhetoric and grand statements of certitude. We stomp our feet and wonder how the rest of the world is so blind, that they can’t see the absolute truth of our position. The middle is lost -we shout at each other from the edges and there is no gathering in the center. I love Newton. I grew up here- went t0 Pierce, Warren and North. I came back in my adulthood to raise my family here. The caring engagement of the people here in all things- whether its Newton related, politics, work , raising children makes me proud to be a Newtonian. Lets not lose sight of our common ground.
Jason,
I feel that there are, in fact, provable objective facts. Not everything is subjective.
Peter,
Perhaps if conflicting sides would really be open civilly to listening to and discussing with each other, without rejecting or banning the points out of hand, a lot of heat would be dissipated.
Jerry, you beat me to the punch with this article. One good thing about hitting my 80s is that I don’t have a solid answer for many of the items we discuss here. Even better, I don’t have to pretend that I do.
Jerry, I agree with the sentiment expressed in your note. We are all a product or our experiences and our convictions, and, given that, we sometimes disagree. But I think there is something far more troubling that has come to light in our recent conversations, meetings and elections: there have been several instances where important information is either not communicated to the citizenry, or where there has been action on the part of our elected officials to deliberately obfuscate, delay, or change the tone and direction of the conversations/debates. Case in point: prior to our just-completed municipal election, our city solicitor sent an official communication to city council members and those running for city council seats, advising them that “…I caution against responding to questions seeking your opinion on the Riverside and Northland projects as they are the subject of special permits pending before you for approval.” Now, I can only speak for myself, however, for me, the Riverside and Northland projects, and other development projects currently in the works, were and still are the single most important issue facing the city in the last several election cycles. Our solicitor’s note was not based on legal precedent/the law, but on the solicitor’s opinion. I am sorry to say that on that day, the motives of certain elected officials in Newton were laid bare for all to see – and the negative commentary came from far and wide as the Boston Globe picked up the story. I agree with being able to debate and to disagree, and our process must be allowed to come to fruition, but when individuals believe that debate and conversation must not be allowed, especially just prior to an election, we have to begin asking questions.
Wishing all of you a merry and happy day!