I think one of the benefits of the class and program in which we are enrolled is that we not only learn from our professor and our texts, but we also have the opportunity to learn from each other. I am offering some thoughts in response to a few blog posts that I hope will provide members of the class with some information about a viewpoint that may be different from their own. Since beginning the social work program, I have been challenged regularly to put my own ideas on the back burner long enough to really consider another person's viewpoint, even if it is different from my own. Sometimes this reconsideration has changed my thinking, other times it has not, but each time it was fairly considered. I hope that sharing my own viewpoint will help people to reframe their thinking about individuals who support conservative politics. After all, faith-based nonprofits currently provide a multitude of public service to individuals in a variety of settings and receive significant government funding to do so. So, regardless of your own religious values, please understand that this is not an attempt to promote my own, but to share how they effect my ideas and my work.
In response to the Heritage Foundation, several times the word "ignorant" has been used to discuss the ideas and agenda of that organization. Regardless of my own stance on their agenda, I do not think the word "ignorant" is a fair descriptor of the individuals who make up the organization. Being a relatively conservative Christian, I would like to offer the idea that, more often than not, people who hold conservative views based on their religion, are in fact far from ignorant about situations and issues at hand. Personally, in regards to several "hot button" issues, I know that it is irresponsible and unfair to simply choose to go along with the conservative side, without ever considering all of the layers of issues. Because of this, I, and others like me, often do far more research on issues than those of the non-religious public, and even then, when we do choose a "side" it is done so with caution, an open mind, and a lot of thought. This research involves seeking out sources of information both by Christian and secular key players in the issues. It is more a process of evolutionary understanding than of selecting a specific "right" or "wrong" and being stuck on that belief. While I am well aware that this "evolutionary process" of understanding does not apply to everyone, I have found after several years at Christian college and after working for a church in a denomination that is centuries old, that this is the case more often than not.
Like it or not, anyone who is serving in a public arena will be challenged to consider and understand ideas that are the polar opposite of their own, and will at some point be challenged to work collaboratively with individuals or organizations who hold differing beliefs or political values. I think "ignorant" can be a dangerous word to use - for either side - when you are speaking about a group of people with whom you are not personally familiar.
Kristen,
ReplyDeleteI just want to commend you on this post. I think it is important for people so stand-up for their view, which is often hard when it is different from others. I do not really identify myself as a follower of either conservative or liberal politics, as I tend to pick and choose what I want to support. However, I come from a somewhat conservative household, and found throwing words such as "ignorant" around on this blog to be inconsiderate. I really appreciated this post, because I think it is important when communicating with each other in class or on this blog to be mindful that everyone has different beliefs. I think we start heading in the wrong direction as Public Administrators if we do not consider all view points when making decisions.
I’d like to point out that I have not used the word “ignorant” or one of its derivations in The Heritage Foundation blog conversations. Though I do not believe this post was directed at me, I just wanted to clear myself (I suppose I’m self serving to some degree – guilty I am). I do agree that the word has special weight.
ReplyDeleteFor me, this post too closely associates the concepts of “conservative” and “religious”/”Christian.” There are undoubtedly religious individuals who self-identify as “liberal” and vice versa, so it may be less than constructive to use the ideas somewhat interchangeably. After all, religion (including, but not limited to the Christian faith) possesses no monopoly on morality/ideology, though many individuals derive their views from religious teachings (or at least interpretations of these dogmas).
I honed in on the following section:
“I, and others like me, often do far more research on issues than those of the non-religious public…”
Instead of drawing lines along religious/ideological cleaves and making semi-generalizations, consequently creating different groups of “we,” we should ideally accept only one group of “we” and that is the group of us all, regardless of perceived differences. We need to be careful (myself included) when writing about controversial subjects. It is better to unite than divide. I’m here for the team. Go us!
And to continue my self-serving activity, please consider revisiting the recently posted edutainment [believe it or not, this is a word] links found in my post 2/28 entitled “What’s Next – Beyond Social Media & Watson”:
http://paff5522011.blogspot.com/2011/02/whats-next-beyond-social-media-and.html
Finally, feel free to comment if you find any of the clips intriguing and relevant! I find them significant and relevant, and this is why I share. At least one of our classmates appears to agree. So join the club! Remember, inclusion rather than exclusion?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAndrew I agree. I find your argument compelling, especially in regards to not using the words religious and conservative interchangeably (although I think Kristen may have done so in response to a generalization made in a previous post) for the reasons you have already stated.
ReplyDeleteI think it would be best if people do not view this blog as pointing the finger at just one person/s but rather as a reminder to all of us (myself included) that some of the words we use can be offensive to people with beliefs different from our own.
I too am here for the team and will jump on the bandwagon with a GO US!
First, I will apologize for using the word ignorant, twice. Guilty. However, I was in no way, shape, or form implying that conservatism was synonymous with religion, or vice versa. Indeed, the term "neo-conservative" in America means the same thing as "neo-liberal" for the rest of the world. Just as "libertarian" is more closely related to conservative politics rather than what its prefix would suggest. It is all a matter of perspective or interpretation.
ReplyDeleteMy use of "ignorant" was directed at those that refuse to question ideas or values of those that supply them. "Ignorance" to me includes people, groups, or organizations that accept or propagate hegemonic ideas and values.
I wholeheartedly agree that it will be a part of our role as nonprofit managers to respect the ideas/values of those that differ from us. And, I am more than willing to sit down and discuss such things in a respectful manner.
Thank you for reading, considering, and commenting. As Rebecca said, the post was definitely not meant to point fingers but just as a reminder to all of us to be considerate and careful of the words that we choose. At the end of the day, any of the good work we hope to do will be done better as we continue learning how to listen to and understand each other.
ReplyDelete