Thinking of group dynamics: the manner in which we address something in our midst which challenges or defies our shared values defines our shared values.

People are often surprised by this. They want their (for example) anger to give them impunity for how they speak, accuse, or blame.

it doesn't work like that. It's wise to make these constraints explicit by way of an on-the-record commitment, before they need to be acted on.

Here's a thought: anger cannot sustain a system indefinitely.

It's very much like anaerobic respiration.

There is clearly a fresh wellspring of hostile, toxic energy since Covid. But no matter the scale and scope of it, it can't power everything (or indeed anything) forever. Eventually a new source of energy must be found.

A lot of political will currently hinges on anger, hostility and aggression. Anger fuels things for a (surprisingly) long time. But it is eventually, inevitably depleted.

I nearly did a foolish thing as I was internally chiding a person for doing that same foolish thing.

I got an email that had one line in it which concerned me greatly. I started replying right away, muttering to myself that email is a terrible medium for you to tell me this in. So ripe for misinterpretation!

It took me 1hr or so of stewing to realise that I was about to perpetuate the exact problem I was feeling.

I deleted my reply, started a video call, and the matter is settled.

Phewf.

Saw people striking because of low wages. Apparently these people got a 1% raise, which is admittedly not great in the face of the rising cost of living.

But what caught my eye was someone had a sign that read "1% is for milk!"

My gut reaction? No it is NOT!

Maintaining some kind of journal is a great way to discover I keep having the same epiphany every 3 months.

None of us can never escape our egocentrism.

But we must keep trying.

I want to put everything else on hold, and just talk about the Diplomat.

Communication has a relatively new barrier: people are angry!

This has been heightening over the past few years, but it spiked during Covid.

Part of being trauma-informed in this moment is recognising that anger is everywhere. Folks don't know why -- they may not even know *that* they are angry! (Anger often precludes self-awareness.)

We need to recognise that the core of polarisation is anger. I believe it needs to be framed this way, so it can be dealt with this way. Anger can be processed.

I was working with a team to present a report to our broader organisation at our annual meeting. The annual report and the report are part of gov't requirements of the organisation.

We had a range of ideas, dreams and plans I wanted to share in that event/report. But the other people interpreted the gov't requirements as the whole directive, instead of just a list of core requirements we could freely build on.

We ended up with yet another boring report at a boring meeting.

People are funny.

You know the joke format, popularised on Twitter, that starts off with:

"No-one: "

That's a double negative. The premise is that no-one is saying nothing. In other words, no-one is silent. It implies that everyone is saying something.

This has bugged me for years!

Is Fox finally starting to take its role in the national/international/global credibility crisis seriously?

I doubt it.

I hope so.

I have to believe that Fox viewers don't want to be lied to. I have to believe that truth matters to them. I have to believe that this isn't a grift (or a political game) they are all actively aiding and adding to.

For my own sanity, I have to believe that at least some of them will wake up to how deceived they've been, and that they will demand a reckoning.

Forgot I was scrolling through Twitter again. The phrase "tyrannical tyrants" reminded me.

I forget where I saw this, but someone recently was appealing to individuals with "true power" -- by that they meant people who could make bold decisions, and effectively force compliance.

No-one has that. No-one is sovereign, especially not in democracy.

Power comes from trust. Trust is earned slowly and lost quickly. Making a bold decision, and turning that into sustained action are two very different things.

By all means, advocate for change, just not through one individual's power.

I can't imagine needing to leave my home because my regional leader is such a massive, belligerent twit.

Of course, there's no way I could live under what several US Republican governors and politicians are doing. Failing any ability to curtail their efforts, I would move, obviously.

I just mean that I'm literally unable to imagine people in my life wielding that kind of power, and wreaking that kind of havoc on citizens' lives with impunity.

But I'm not taking that for granted!

#politics

Editing is at least as generous as writing.

A lot of what I've heard proposed as ways to limit and even recover from misinformation simply won't work.

The damage has progressed further and faster than what a lot of people perceive or even imagine.

Media outlets have always been questionable (bias, subjective reporting, too few journalists, etc.), but they had a kind of code.

I don't think Fox losing to Dominion is going to have much impact on either Fox or its audience. No loss would. People just believe what they want to believe now.

"Free speech absolutists only exist in soundbites, they don't exist in reality." -- Jason Hiner

Very interesting panel discussion about content moderation (or lack thereof?) on Substack:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxXSOLWQH_4