The lesson I learn from the US Democrat and Republican endless non-objective arguments:
Reframe from ideological argument
Because ideological argument are too strong (and intoxicating) to oneself and those who have similar political perception, and too weak (and stupid) to those who doesn’t. The purpose of dispute is to facilitate communication so as to close with an understanding, not a tap-less water pipe. We only need a parliament session to come to an understanding, or maybe two if the issue on hand is controversial. We don’t have to wait till the end of a ill-initiated four year genocide to justify if liberalism or conservatism win that bet.
I see liberal arguments for Repeal377a, in the name of Freedom. I also see conservative arguments against Repeal377a, in the name of Stability. A flawed polarity which leaves us with two choice — Repeal it or suffer-international-shame-of-orientation-discrimination; Appeal it or our-children-will-be-influence-into-homosexuals. Apart from Black and White, how about gray? And if not enough, did anyone think of green, red or blue?
Do something, don’t just talk. Keeping quiet doesn’t make one seem wiser too. Propose a solution to solve — not just about appeal or repeal but — this particular dispute.
Help! Any [Radical] Creative Centrist in Singapore?
Courtesy of gallery.hd.org
—
ADOLF LAM
In the Process of Coming out with a Solution…
Post a Comment