No Quarter POLICY: When We Disagree
By SusanUnPC on January 5, 2009 at 10:45 PM in Current Affairs
Lately we’ve disagreed, many of us, about Israel and Palestine. Before the election, many of us disagreed about the candidates. We’ve had countless disagreements, some small, some very large.
FIRST: It is important to keep in mind that, in politics and in world affairs, we will always — at times — disagree with each other.
The views of any one contributor to No Quarter do NOT represent the views of ALL contributors to No Quarter. Our writers are free to express their own viewpoints, different from other writers’ views. To assume we are of ONE mind is, well, it’s mindless.
SECOND: At No Quarter, unlike many blogs, we ENCOURAGE disagreement. You do not have to “toe the line” here in order to participate as a writer or as a reader who comments. During the current Gaza crisis, we have a number of No Quarter writers who have disagreed with Larry’s commentaries, but they have also recognized that Larry is decidedly NOT anti-Jewish and that Larry’s focused criticism is on the military decisions being made by Israel. Very unfairly, Larry has been accused of viewpoints that he does not hold.
We have gladly published articles by our writers who are, for lack of a better term, “pro-Israel.” And we welcome ANY submissions by any of you who disagree with Larry’s points. The only request that Larry ever makes is that articles be thoughtful and factual, and not a propaganda pamphlet. (But we’d expect such standards of any article here at No Quarter, woudn’t we.)
DId you know that, throughout the primaries and the election, we regularly invited people to write a pro-Obama commentary? Especially those who wrote us angry e-mails about our positions? But …
unfortunately, no one ever took us up on our offer. I can sympathize with their hesitancy since they would have doubtless received a rough series of comments, but we would have been equally strict with our readers that they be respectful of that person’s point of view.
Respectful.
That’s really what it’s all about, isn’t it.
We CAN disagree agreeably, can’t we.
If we choose to.
We can be rational in expressing our contrary views.
We can be generously respectful.
What’s more, we will be far more successful in presenting our points of view if we do so in a rational, calm, and deliberate manner of speech and writing.
There are times for anger.
I am angry with the Hamas cadres that are shooting rockets god-knows-where into Israel.
I am angry with the Israelis who are killing too many civilians.
I am angry with George Bush’s lack of assertion and involvement in this predicament.
I am disappointed by Barack Obama’s shyness in speaking out.
Besides, at this blog, we are onlookers from afar at the Gaza crisis. All we have are our opinions.
And if we wish our opinions to be received, we can speak with courage and deep conviction, but we can do so openly, profoundly and – most of all — rationally.
It behooves each of us, if we wish not only to be heard but to be understood, that we speak calmly and thoughtfully.
An angry outburst, in the heat of the moment, feels good.
But it is a fleeting pleasure that, if we are people of conscience, leaves us with deep regrets because we have alienated far more people than we have brought towards understanding our arguments.
Let us all move towards tempering that anger by focusing our hearts and our minds on the very best rational and expressive arguments we can bring to the fore.
You will teach us. And we will teach you. And we all will learn.






















