THE CRUX OF IT : Refusing to respect the disrespectful.

 

The following clip is somewhat astounding due to the disconnect that exists between the commentators. Angela Rye is a lawyer and a political commentator and her opponent is Joe Walsh, a former politician who is seemingly vying for a spot on the political discourse circuit now.  He has a history of inflammatory speech and prejudiced behavior.

The focal point of the argument is the question of standards.

Because their discussion is so engaging, the clip goes by quickly.

I think it’s necessary to recognize the verbal trickery that people like Walsh employ. Anyone not familiar with his history may see him as a reasonable person. That facade is misleading. Drawing an equivalent to how whoever these “white men” he’s talking about is to ignore the basis for behavior. It may not be universal but it would be disingenuous to claim that the reason for mistreatment isn’t based on some known demographic; race / gender.

The host’s final encouragement to the pair was to remain respectful.

Why?

Don’t view that question dismissively.

Why must we respect something that is abhorrent?

Why must we show respect to those that loath the very existence of others?

Why must we “honor your opinion and your right to it” ?

Is it because otherwise things would devolve into strife and chaos with society in the balance and peace being a fleeting concept to be aspired to?

 

THAT IS ALREADY THE STATE OF THINGS!

 

I see no reason to empower those that are prejudiced, manipulative and hateful with respect for the sole purpose of seeming civil.

I see that as weakness.

This type of behavior continues to assert to the women and men that are the oppressors are superior and must be given their due honor.

Although that doesn’t mean that one needs to resort to unintelligent or emotional responses or to  physical hostility at the first opportunity, it shouldn’t prevent one from stating clearly that the respectability those people demand is not an entitlement.

It is past time that we recognize game and call the bigoted practitioners of semantics what they are and disregard their attempts to define the state of all things.