Want to voice an opinion on social media on a subject that’s topical and controversial? Then be prepared for a vicious backlash with criticism often becoming personal.
I’m all for being challenged on the merits of my viewpoints, but personal vitriol is not what I sign up for when outing myself in the public sphere. You are lambasted by the Left if you take a seemingly conservative view and lambasted by conservatives if you’re perceived as too progressive.
Why the compulsion to label anyway? On some issues I’m conservative in my outlook and on others I’m progressive. My thinking is a moveable feast, at times imperfect and often full of contradictory ideas. The only day that I’m compelled to choose one side over the other is Election Day in order to make my vote count.
I put my toe into the water once on a fraught political subject. My 14 year old daughter was brought to tears over the incendiary venom directed my way. She pleaded with me to stop engaging. And she was right. When the interaction deteriorated to that level, I was no longer engaging in a conversation. You’re hardly going to persuade your challenger when expletives are directed your way. Too many people with strong opinions shroud themselves in self-righteous blinkeredness. To contemplate an alternative point of view or, heaven forbid, to change their mind is perceived as a sign of weakness, of moral ineptitude.
Jon Ronson, author of “So you’ve been publicly shamed” at his recent appearance at the Melbourne Writers Festival said there are two types of people in the world: ideologues and humans. The person whose Twitter handle rose to prominence recently on Q & A (Abbott Loves A**l) is an example of the ideologues. On what basis was it appropriate to reference the former PM that way? Glaringly absent was mass condemnation from the Left. And in whose parallel universe was it appropriate to call former PM Julia Gillard someone’s bitch? You’re hardly adding to the public debate when hurling these insults, but the abuse seems to be tolerated by people who share an underlying political perspective with the abuser. People hide behind the anonymity of their screens, happy to be swept along by the mob. There seems to be a complete lack of understanding that these barbs are directed towards people who don’t wear suits of armour.
Limiting my discussions to those who agree with me, while self-affirming, is no challenge. With Facebook and Twitter it’s too easy to curate your exposure to material that just mirrors your own world view. It’s like living in an echo chamber, in which your views are confirmed and amplified ten times over. Engaging with those whose views are dissimilar is difficult, but perhaps more important. Surely the fact that we disagree makes it all the more critical that we talk to each other? Or have we reached the point where we will only listen to those with whom we agree completely?
So what would I say if I wasn’t afraid, if we lived in a world where opposing views were dealt with rigorously but respectfully?
I’d tell the Government and the Opposition that the immigration policy is cruel and unforgiving, and we should be welcoming far more refugees than we currently do, in addition to the 12,000 places recently offered to Syrian refugees. By all means conduct appropriate background checks, but these people are fleeing from the very chaos and violence we all abhor and compassion is not dangerous.
I’d say we have a responsibility to intervene with mass murder taking place in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and most of sub-Saharan Africa, because the world stood by when six million were murdered 75 years ago. Surely we cannot continue to allow mass killing again.
I’d state that Israel, with just 0.12% of the world’s population, unjustly attracts an overwhelming proportion of the world’s opprobrium. The U.N. General Assembly’s current session has adopted 20 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism. Only three other countries were singled out: Syria, Iran and North Korea, each earning one condemnation a piece. Human rights abuses by many other countries were ignored. On this basis are we to believe that Israel is by far and away the world’s worst abuser of human rights?
But I am afraid and fear stifles healthy debate. One alternative is to choose safe subjects such as books, parenting, travel and TV boxed sets. It’s unlikely I’ll be maligned debating the work/parenting balance. Or opt for old-fashioned engagement – a real life conversation, as people tend to temper their abuse when out in the open. I don’t have the stomach for violent engagement. And I’m not prepared for my 14 year old to be brought to tears again over tirades on social media.