Link: nourishing obscurity: [summary] ten points to put you off your breakfast.
There is much that is sad about James Higham’s linked post, but perhaps nothing sadder than this:
"You can see from the blogosphere that everyone with a computer has his own ‘take’ on events and isn’t really interested in anyone else’s, except insofar as it supports his own conclusions."
Is it true? I hope not entirely, though there is certainly a grain of truth.
Months ago, I set myself the task of visiting political blogs of opposing views and trying to engage in debate. I called it my "smash the goldfish bowls" experiment, as I pictured each blogger as a solitary fish in a bowl. I didn’t achieve much. One or two idealistic young chaps engaged with genuine pleasure but mainly it was, as James fears, a dialogue of the deaf.
Can we at least hope that in posting our views on the internet, we are laying ourselves open to be challenged? Can we at least hope that someone, somewhere may occasionally have a change of heart? And, if we can’t, why do we continue?








Leave a comment