RE: EXTRA! EXTRA! Get it here FIRST!

Thanks, Vicki, you're exactly correlation between having power and being (as you correctly put it) immovable is pretty much direct. It's like the more you have, the more you have to lie to yourself about how it's validly yours. Extend this far enough, and nationalism leading to violence not only makes sense, but becomes the only option. 

I wonder if we make the mistake of attempting diplomatic niceties with an enemy that really would take no quarter with us, in one sense. Bill O'Reilly has no morals, obviously, but people not only listen to him, but take his word as gospel. These people are the immovable ones, and concentrating on the folks on the fence, you're right, is the only way to get a point across without burnout. I just wonder how many of these people are left - eventually, people just sink too deep into their lifestyle to ever willingly come out of it, even for truth. I feel like so many people bought in so whole-heartedly following 9/11 that maybe the scales have tipped in their favor, and maybe it's a losing cause here and now. Not to say we should give up, but I'm just really sad that people are finally getting worried now that things have already gone way too far, just like a million times before. At what p
 oint do we have to accept that we're bound to repeat the mistakes of the past?


From: "Vicki Mercer" <[email protected]>

>I learned (the hard way) that it isn't worth it try to change people's
>minds if they are obviously immovable.  Since then, I've focused all my
>activism efforts on helping to inform and empower people who are
>fundamentally empathetic, but uninformed, undecided, and/or inactive.
>
>Remember, we need a majority, not a plurality.  It really doesn't matter
>if my father and sister remain loyal Republicans and
>anti-environmentalists.  The same is true for your parents.  And people
>who care need to avoid burnout, which is a sure thing when you attempt
>to do the impossible (i.e., try to change people's minds when they are
>obviously immovable).
>
>The most difficult thing is to try to change people.  It's much easier,
>and indeed more effective, to change how you respond to people who
>should change (if they knew what was best for them and all living
>things).  No response, or a brief "I disagree" is an acceptable
>response.  For family and friends who should change but never will, I
>suggest you talk about other things entirely, unless perchance they ask
>for your opinion.  And then, provide it calmly without attempting to
>change their beliefs.



____________________________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
[email protected]
http://ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/