« Things haven't changed that much... | Main | Still shutting up and listening »
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Sometimes it's good to just shut up and listen
[Important... update your links: Treppenwitz is changing location. Assuming you'd like to continue coming here you'll probably want to change any bookmarks or blogrolls linking to this site to the following: www.treppenwitz.com . It seems I will probably not be staying with my current hosting service for much longer, so by changing your links to www.treppenwitz.com , you'll automatically be able to continue coming here no matter where my site may end up being hosted in the future. Please do it now... I'd hate to lose you.]
OK, back to business:
In the midst of a potentially contentious discussion here the other day, I opted to take a step back and recused myself from my own comment board. The basic reason I did so was that I realized belatedly that I had taken a stand on something about which I didn't have nearly enough background information.
An article that Imshin posted on her site brought home for me how little I actually knew about the intricacies of land ownership in this part of the world. I still feel my initial hypothesis was sound, but I didn't like the feeling of espousing or defending an opinion based on gut instinct rather than historical fact.
It really isn't enough to be right. A lucky guess or educated hunch can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands.
I think most people who come here realize that I frequently bring up topics in order to explore my own ideas rather than to publicly espouse a clearly defined position. But even such tentative treatment of a topic requires a modicum of homework... and clearly I hadn't done mine.
I have to say that stepping back from the discussion was a liberating experience. Too often we become besotted with our own opinions, positions and self-righteousness... and we forget that if we'd only shut up for a few minutes there is a whole world of information out there just waiting to be weighed and considered.
Sometimes as we listen we get welcome confirmation of our most deeply held beliefs. And other times, as scary as it may be, we notice a bit of validity in an opposing argument. It's interesting that the people who always seem to be in 'transmit mode' are the one's who are least interested in hearing that hint of a valid argument from the other side.
Going forward I'm going to make a concerted effort to spend at least as much time listening as I do talking.
Speaking of information worthy of consideration (and of information you might not be allowed to consider)... if you haven't read this brutally frank current assessment of the 'fourth estate' (both here and in the US), please go read this article (hat tip Avi). Just set aside what you think you know... and read.
Don't thank me... I'm a giver.
Posted by David Bogner on January 3, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c581e53ef00e5505227e68834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sometimes it's good to just shut up and listen:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Yes, but... I read the passages you linked to.
None of it materially changes your core premise.
Nobody can tell you how to run your blog, but... one of the criticisms leveled at settlers/the right is that we don't have an alternate vision, we just take potshots at what "the leaders" do, or sniff that others are not as idealistic/patriotic as we are.
You're thoughtful approach can play into that - what is the bottom line, policy wise?
I (like you) am trading here-comes-the-fence stories with my friends in other settlements. It really is upon us to formulate some real (and even forceful!) policy suggestions, rather than working out what's the ideal, maximally *nice* position.
Either that or buy a tent...
Posted by: Ben-David | Jan 3, 2006 1:27:09 PM
Ben-David... "None of it materially changes your core premise" Uh, I hate to burst your bubble but I don't really have a core premise (other than some basic religious values that are only tangentially related to the politics of this discussion).
With that said, I should point out that it is also not the exclusive province of either the right or left to 'take potshots at the leadership' rather than formulating clear alternative policies.
It is always easier to identify what you don't like than what you do. Hell, when I go to a restaurant I need to watch the waitress walk by with 7 or 8 entrees I don't want before I spot one that appeals to me.
My 'thoughtful approach' is not about being 'maximally nice', but rather about trying to gather information from as many sources as possible before coming to a conclusion.
Too many people have been telling me lately that "those without a solution have no business discussing the problem", and that's just plain wrong-headed. Bad decisions are historically made by people who rush directly to ill-conceived judgement/action instead of listening to a wide range of opinions first.
Yes, there is a time to act... and that time may even be right this second. But I'm not equipped to answer right now so if you need my test paper back right this very minute I'll have to turn it in blank.
If, however, you are asking me to float some promising ideas that might have merit, then I'll whisper quietly that I think we (the settlers) should stop acting illegally (confronting/assaulting troops, throwing up non-viable 'Mc-settelements' on every hilltop just to piss off the government, wasting our time and energy with meaningless demonstrations), and think about stealing a page from the Arab play book: Let's start flooding the courts with requests for injunctions and other legal paperwork that can't be ignored. Let's start forcing the government to demonstrate the legality, humanity and justice of every meter of the fence that you and I both know will eventually be built. Let's get land ownership specialists and surveyors to once, and for all define what the status is over every meter of the land in question instead of relying on anecdotal information and deliberately biased media pronouncements.
I am pretty sure that this approach will provide the best results, and that it will also offer the last, best chance for the settler movement to shed the pariah mantle that was deliberately dumped on it by the Prime Minister and the media during the disengagement from Gaza.
Posted by: treppenwitz | Jan 3, 2006 2:14:00 PM
David, I have not been following the thread you mentioned because i have always felt that it was useless to discuss these issues without a detailed topographcal map in hand outlining the land parcels and their current ownership, deed records, etc. i am glad to see that discussion of some of these complexities has been initiated.
Having said that, I would urge you to find a copy of New Yorker from a few weeks ago, where i read a book review of a work that demonstrated that experts and pundits often did worse than people acting on their gut instincts in determining the outcome of policies or events. I will try to track down the exact issue. So while my instincts are notably to the left of yours, don't discount your intuition entirely.
Posted by: jordan Hirsch | Jan 3, 2006 4:08:41 PM
To be honest, that JPost article just strikes me as "same old". Both right and left claim that the media is biased towards the other. Here in the US the right points to negative news from Iraq as proof of a leftward lean and the left points to a perceived lack of detailed analysis of Bush policies in the run up to war as proof of a rightward slant.
My guess is that most people just come to an article with an opinion already in place, cherry pick whatever they like and brindle at whatever doesn't jibe with their current mind set. Maybe a good exercise would be to go to a news source that produces opinions we disagree with, read it and then resist the temptation to respond for at least 24 hours, till that first angry edge wears off.
On a different note - if you change hosting, could you find one with a wider comments box?
Lastly, as for this: "Let's get land ownership specialists and surveyors to once, and for all define what the status is over every meter of the land in question instead of relying on anecdotal information and deliberately biased media pronouncements." That would be an excellent start.
Posted by: Lisoosh | Jan 3, 2006 5:24:35 PM
It must be kismet, because just after reading this, I went to israelperspectives.blogspot to check out your friendly right wing settler point of view. He has a post entitled "Can't we all just get along?" and writes this:
"I have known Haim for the better part of the 3 years that I have lived in Israel, and in that time I have come to find his views to be as far to left as my views are to the right. At the same time, what sets Haim apart from others whose viewpoints I disagree with is that he has the ability, generally speaking, to articulate in a very clear and convincing manner the reasoning behind his beliefs and ideology, and to allow someone like myself, who more often than not, disagrees with what he is saying, to at least appreciate why it is that he believes what he does.
On many occasions I have told Haim that if not for the fact that I am an observant, G-d fearing (I try to be...) Jew, who believes in the divinity of the Written and Oral Law (among other things), that I would agree with everything he says. However, being that I am all of the above things, we agree on very little, aside from the fact that the Jewish People belong in Israel (albeit, for somewhat different reasons)."
Cute.
Posted by: Lisoosh | Jan 3, 2006 5:46:53 PM
i've updated my links. good luck on the new site. :)
Posted by: no milk | Jan 3, 2006 5:59:43 PM
listening is often quite challening...it's easy to assign greater priority to our own thoughts and ideas than those of others. I've found this to be all too true in my own life in many different relationships. I opine that our listening difficulties stem from several issues, one of which is the need to be heard, to talk, to know that people are listening, and that they care. As such, one may often times go to great lengths to ensure that one's point is understood, which sometimes makes others feel as though they are being told that they are not important (enough to be heard), which can obviously be damaging to relationships. The listening thing is very difficult to manage- it's hard to ask the right questions to show that you're interested without asking too many questions (showing that you're trying too hard, and not actually listening). Sometimes that's what happens when you're very passionate about a certain issue. Listen, I'm sure that you're a very good listener as is- just look at this as improving your responses for a given situation (the situation being a debate/discussion, obviously...not just a simple dialogue). Keep up the good work. Oh, and our country is simply amazing. It was like I had returned home after a very long trip, even though it was my first time there (in Israel). Iy"h, see you in the future. Stay well.
Posted by: tnspr569 | Jan 3, 2006 6:30:27 PM
I changed your link thanks for letting us know.
Posted by: Jewish Blogmeister | Jan 3, 2006 9:18:33 PM
Jordan... I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know the issue since I get them here a couple of weeks behind schedule from my parents. Thanks.
Lisoosh... I know this response is going to sound blunt... I apologize in advance. If we were sitting over a cup of coffee I promise it wouldn't sound as blunt as it reads. Anyway... It only seemed 'same old' to you because you aren't thinking about the fact that the Israeli media 'fessed up' to carrying water for Sharon during the disengagement instead of doing their real job as the people's watchdog. The problem is that they admitted it in a very non-introspective way, and there was almost zero outrage from the public afterwards. That is what the article is about. From a free, independent press point of view this was an earthquake... but both the media and the public are treating it like a harmless sonic boom. This isn't a case of 'well that cuts both ways'. There is nobody in Israel who will seriously suggest that the media here has a right-leaning bias. Nobody. Please take a deep breath and admit that not every criticism of the left can be answered with 'I know you are but what am I' type dismissal. Also, there is no 'right wing settler point of view' any more than there is a single 'left wing liberal point of view'. These kind of labels do everyone a disservice and suggest a monolithic single mindedness that simply doesn't exist on either side.
No Milk... Thanks. Good to see you writing again! It was a loooong November without you.
tnspr596... I can't tell if you are being ironic or not. I'm going to guess yes. :-)
Jewish Blogmiester... Good man. Thanks.
Posted by: treppenwitz | Jan 3, 2006 9:36:15 PM
ironic? I honestly don't see where you got that impression from. Do explain, kind sir. I thought I was being totally serious. Sorry if I got too personal there- I just got back from Israel last night, so I'm still very confused. One more random question- do your children's friends call you Mr. Bogner or David? Just wondering, since Tonny calls you Mr. B...
take care.
Posted by: tnspr569 | Jan 3, 2006 9:55:06 PM
David, not being privy to Hebrew language Israeli press I'm not in a position to comment on it and was actually commenting on the press in general and in the US in particular, sorry, should have made that clear.
As to "right wing settler", I actually really like Ze'evs blog and didn't mean that as a critisism, that struck me as how he defines himself. It was meant to come across as ironic. Sorry if I offended.
Posted by: Lisoosh | Jan 3, 2006 11:37:43 PM
Good advice all around. Off to update the link...you'd make a wonderful announcer for PBS (please call now...)...
Posted by: mcaryeh | Jan 4, 2006 2:24:19 AM
I don't read or speak Hebrew and my acquaintance with the J.P., though generally positive and very impressed with its variety of viewpoints, is mainly confined to the few weeks I've been in Israel each of he last two years.
However, even with such a meager background (and with the NY Times as my main US view of the press, I am a little horrified by the writer in the J.P. which we were given the link to. I would arge at great length with her assessment of the 'movement' there to mask the 'victories' in Iraq (my hat's off to anyone or group that can manipulate the whole US press !!!).
This J.P. writer, however, indulges in one comparison that, for me, makes everything else suspect: she compares the Israeli press to that of North Korea. Can she be serious? The N. Korean monolithic dictator, at his best, is not in the same ballpark, let alone sentence, with even the worst leader of a working democracy--in Israel, the US, even in Russia!
Whether Israelis (and their journalists) worship Mr. Sharon or verbally thrash him daily, at their (the voters') pleasure, he will be returned to his robe and slippers for a nice long rest.
The J.P. writer should also recognize that even the Bush administration in the US, which has done the slickest job of media and public opinion manipulation in US history, even they cannot control that entire, ungainly, and unweildy mass of newsprint, TV, magazine, and now internet coverage of Iraq and the rest of the world. Conspiracies of that magnitude are mighty hard to bring about!
I cannot take seriously the case made by a writer (a journalist, no less) who speaks of Sharon as that level of dictator, and of some colossal manipulation of the US media (by whom?). It just won't wash!
Posted by: Delmar Bogner | Jan 4, 2006 4:03:08 AM
I've heard a lot about the monolithism of Israeli media, and I'm wondering how it came about. Considering the multitude of various parties in Israel, it's surprising at least some movements don't have their own magazines, and major news sites. Any particular reason there's such a monopoly on information?
Posted by: Irina | Jan 4, 2006 5:45:22 AM
