Time For Passion Without the Anger

A Letter to the Editor from Meredith Yoder:

Is it possible to be passionate about politics without being angry? Being open-minded and accepting that different opinions exist is HARD work. Political opinions differ, but angrily fighting over the appropriateness of organizing to share those opinions threatens our fundamental sense of community. To this end, I believe we need to change the way we talk to each other, especially online.

Up until recently I was not fully aware of how intensely the polarized political climate was affecting discourse at the local level - between community members and neighbors in our small town of Reading. I truly love this town. I was born and raised in Reading and I’m raising my own family here. My parents have been here for over 40 years and will continue their retirement years in Reading. In all of these years, I’ve known friends who were more conservative than me and friends who were more liberal. I’ve never felt uncomfortable about sharing my opinion about political issues. I’ve even enjoyed healthy debates with friends despite my parents’ classic advice never to talk to your friends about religion or politics!

Why then does this town election cycle seem so much more contentious? Why does sharing a political opinion or openly endorsing a candidate seem to cause so much anger? Recently a list of local candidate endorsements from a liberal leaning group of citizens called POP (Powerful Organized People) was posted without consent to a community Facebook page by folks who seemed angered by the existence of this group and their positions. A LOT of debate over this email ensued online — some of which devolved into specific attacks on people. People who are not living in Boston or in Washington. People who are our neighbors.

I tried to reconcile why this got so heated. It’s not new to town elections that different individuals or organizations would endorse specific candidates or even share those preferences to their members in emails. Sending a list of who you or an organized group would vote for doesn’t seem that much different than writing letters to the editor, canvassing for a candidate, or coordinating teams to hold signs in town square to show support. Some people seemed frustrated that the list did not include people that did align with the POP group’s preferred positions. Anger-filled conspiracy theories suggested that this was a “national infiltration” though the POP group was started by Reading residents. Others seemed upset that this list could be interpreted as a directive, despite the author writing that it was a guide and that she recognized members come with diverse views. Maybe some just didn’t agree with the endorsements and were favoring other candidates and viewpoints. For whatever reason, this particular debate resonated strongly and deeply with many residents who watched and cringed at the thread of rapid fire comments over social media - from both sides of the debate.

I’m not a member of the POP group who distributed the newsletter. However, I was on the list of open seat write-in candidates that they endorsed because I know several POP members as friends and fellow RPS parents. These friends had asked me to be a write-in for my precinct since we shared beliefs about our town and schools and because they trust me to ask the opinions of my neighbors when it comes to town meeting decisions. To be honest, during this heated thread, I actually started to regret seeking a write-in position because the town’s political climate seems so angry right now. Is that really something I want to subject myself to for the next year? Is it possible to be passionate about politics without being angry? The answer I eventually came to is Yes.

I get it. Politics (even town politics) requires passion about your beliefs. When each opposing opinion is equally true to the people who believe in them, the opposite point of view can seem ridiculous and even infuriating. This type of commitment can lead to feeling like you are being personally attacked when your perspective is being called “wrong” or someone promotes the alternative view. It’s hard not to feel compelled to retaliate. However I believe it will be the job of our elected officials and engaged residents alike to find a way to debate, share our opinions, and compromise without angrily destroying our sense of community in the process.

Maya Angelou said, “I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.” As fleeting as an internet comment or accusation may seem and as anonymous as the recipient may be, we shouldn’t ignore that we could be creating real and lasting feelings that no beers at Bunratty’s can unwind. Going forward, I hope it is still possible to make each other feel welcome in our community, even without total agreement.

Meredith Yoder, Curtis Street