My Photo

The Out Campaign

Atheist Blogroll

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2005

« New Fishnet Story: "Christian Domestic Discipline" | Main | No Excuses: Why Calling Congress Isn't A Waste Of Time, Part 2 »

Comments

yogurtbacteria

Another way to speak out:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/771?e=12&ref=image

Dean Allemang

I was one of the "I don't call/write unless I am sufficiently well-informed to believe in whatever I am going to say." people. But you bring up an interesting point - certain groups, especially religious groups - can motivate masses of people to write or call, without being sufficiently informed. So my first reaction was, well, I should do that, too. I should just respond to every call by an organization I roughly agree with, e.g., HRC, moveon, etc., and write/call/email whenever they tell me to. Then they will have power similar to the religious right. That's good, right?

But then I thought wait a minute - another part of the problem is decision making by idiots. Or to be more exact, decision making by people who don't bother to think things through. Will it really help the cause of just government, if I just contribute to the thoughtless hoards who write/call whenever someone tells me to? I might agree with moveon's overall goals, but they aren't infallible. Don't I really have a responsibility to look at least a bit before I ask my congressperson to leap?

Greta Christina
Don't I really have a responsibility to look at least a bit before I ask my congressperson to leap?

Yes. I certainly think you have a responsibility to look at least a bit. I don't want us all to become the mindless hordes of the HRC and the ACLU.

But I also think there's a cutoff point at which it's okay to call or write even though you don't know everything there is to know about an issue. If we wait until we have every single possible piece of information on an issue before we act, we'll be paralyzed. (And I think -- hell, from personal experience I know -- that "I don't know enough about this" can often simply be an excuse to not get involved.)

The guideline I'm suggesting is that if you know enough about an issue to have an opinion about it and to care how it comes out, you know enough to call or write.

But if you don't like that criterion, then another might be: Read at least one argument for, and one argument against. And another might be to see how the organizations who make endorsements are lining up. If every progressive organization I support is for something, and every conservative organization I can't stand is against it, then probably I'm going to be for it. If the progressives themselves are fighting and debating about it, that tells me I need to learn more.

Dylan

I wrote my senator today after reading this blog. Unfortunately, my senator is Mitch McConnell.

yogurtbacteria

"But I also think there's a cutoff point at which it's okay to call or write even though you don't know everything there is to know about an issue."

That makes sense. Even with a small increase in the likelihood that people are taking the right stance, a large number of people writing in betters the likelihood that the average letter will be right, even if a lot of them are still wrong. I.e. even if you might be wrong, you're helping drag the mean in the right direction.

lunalelle

I barely have enough motivation to vote in my state, much less write letters. Even our urban hubs, with the exception of one, are extremely conservative and will continue to vote ineffective, stubborn, and frustratingly right wing representatives into office.

What real difference would my disregarded, likely-not-even-read letters mean here in Texas?

Jeffrey

It's funny you mention this, because I was thinking about my Congress persons earlier today. The thought that crossed my mind was this: When we elect officials, we pick the person that would do the best job, and then they do what they feel is best. I'm torn about this post, because I get that we want them to 'hear our voice'. But, I don't want my Congress persons to be swayed by the constituency. I want to select them for their stances, their positions, etc., right? I don't know. I am underthinking this? Overthinking?

sav

Greta, thanks for writing this. I was the one who posted on Facebook the other day "Can someone tell me why I shouldn't be cynical about politics?"

But, as I later followed up, I have all my reps', the governor, and the White House lines in my phone. I call and write them often (more than twice a month--that's a conservative estimate). I keep up on a lot of issues. I'm very passionate about it.

But yet, I still get cynical. So I thank you for writing this because it is basically the mantra I repeat to myself to get myself out of my cynical funk. I should bookmark it and read it whenever I get that way again.

One suggestion I'd offer to folks who want to engage but don't feel as informed is this: I read a lot about a lot of issues and constantly feel like I still don't know enough or know everything there is to know on a subject. We are citizens, not experts. I have to constantly remind myself of this. We can have opinions and not know everything. That's OK. Plus, we view things from our own perspective. My perspective is not your perspective is not the dude down the street's perspective. We all have something to offer in the debate. So speak up.

One other tip I'd give is to try, especially for the things you really care about, to not send the form e-mails you may get from the various groups you subscribe to. Someone mentioned MoveOn.org. That would be an example. If you have little time, then sending these forms is a good way to get yourself counted among the masses. But reps much prefer an individual e-mail or a phone call or a visit to their offices. Sometimes, I base my personal e-mail off these form e-mails, but I don't need to do that as much these days. Also, when you call your reps' office, you don't have to say why you take one position over the other. You just say to the intern answering the phone "I'm calling today to ask my rep. to support such and such" or "to oppose such and such." You don't even have to know the bill number. Just the issue--say, health care--that you are calling about.

For people who live in California in the U.S., the governor's line discourages contact with a real person by having you vote in favor of something by pressing 1 and against something by pressing 2. It's really easy and really fast, though the format sort of bothers me. I'd rather talk to someone.

I hope this information is useful to some of you.

ninthdayexposure

"What real difference would my disregarded, likely-not-even-read letters mean here in Texas?"

This might be an overly simplistic view of politics (and I apologize if that's the case) but I thought that Matt Dillahunty from the Atheist Community of Austin explained it pretty nicely, why progressives in Texas (or any red state) should still vote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5CpcWIYjFI

Jen R

You know, I just had a thought. The thing that sometimes hinders me from sending a letter is that I have to go and look up the office address, figure out the right form for a formal letter, etc. I would totally use a service that would let you fill in whatever text you want in the body, and then outputs it as a properly-addressed and formatted letter, ready for printing.

I might think about setting that up, actually.

Of course, this would only matter if printed letters were taken more seriously by Congressional offices than emails are. I don't know if that's the case anymore or not.

Greta Christina
What real difference would my disregarded, likely-not-even-read letters mean here in Texas?

I answer that in Part 2. Short answer:

(a) The letters are too read.

(b) Not calling and not voting feeds the vicious circle. If every progressive in Texas started calling or emailing their representatives, it might make them think twice about reflexively moving to the right on every issue.

(c) Even if calling or emailing your representative really is a waste of time, you can still call the President, the Speaker of the House, etc.

Greta Christina
Of course, this would only matter if printed letters were taken more seriously by Congressional offices than emails are. I don't know if that's the case anymore or not.

It's not the case anymore. In fact, ever since the anthrax scare, snail mail to elected officials is slower to get read than email or phone calls.

Christine

Hi Greta,

I saw your post on facebook, and I meant to respond but didn't quite get around to it. That's pretty much the same reason I don't usually contact my representatives. I start to write the email, then I get hung up on wording or something. If I get stuck on it for long enough, I decide to do something else and come back to it later. The reality is that I rarely come back to it. I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but having an example or form letter that I could copy and tweak as needed would make me much more likely (doubly, at least) to send the damn email.

That said, I did force myself to slog through a message to Dianne Feinstein last week. I wish I'd thought to save a copy to use as a template for writing to my other representatives.

thediamondmind.blogspot.com

Excellent, well-written, astutely reasoned argument. Thanks for posting this. I hope you don't mind that I linked this for others to read.

-- Eddie

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe/ Donate to This Blog!

Books of mine

Greta on SSA Speakers Bureau


  • Greta Christina is on the Speakers Bureau of the Secular Students Alliance. Invite her to speak to your group!

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Powered by Rollyo

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Atheism

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Sex

Some Favorite Posts: Art, Politics, Other Stuff