I believe that the "pro-Palestinian/Hamas" demonstrators see themselves as not only demonstrating against Israel/Jews, but also against the "establishment/government". Ironic, isn't it, that their beef (the same one against countless generations of college/university students have demonstrated) is in favour of an establishment whose control over the people has been unlike anything they've ever experienced. This is but the latest manifestation of bigotry, which is rampant in all societies, but kept under wraps in a "politically correct" society. The non politically-correct commonly talked about forms of bigotry are racism, religious intolerance, sexism, intolerance of gender expression, but we all know about fat-shaming, disdain of the physically infirm, developmentally challenged, snobbery against the poor and uneducated...all this to say, no, I don't see a society needing shared values, just the wisdom to tolerate the "other" because they too are God's creations, and none of us are wise enough to judge God's plan.
I agree that we need acceptance of the other side's right to its own opinion as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others to enjoy theirs. Today's protests are depriving Jewish students and faculty members from attending classes and Jewish businesses and temples from serving the community. Tolerance ends where intolerance begins.
I think what I'm getting at is that all human beings carry prejudices...based on life experiences, teachings, media, books. Because of that, a society can't have the same values at that level: some people may have a fear of men, of boys, of blacks, of whites, of sick people, of cops, of politicians, of doctors, of "the system", of Muslims, of Jews, of priests, of LGBTQ people...it goes on. Everyone has a responsibility to be an "ambassador" for the best they represent. If they think that "best" is to hurt of even eradicate others, then clearly they are no better than common criminals. So, I think I'm saying the same as you, but with an added nuance...struggling to define "values".
I like this article about values, and think you’ve hit the nail on the head. If these values are up for ‘renegotiation’ then we now have a problem with the social contract. And that’s is a really big problem!!
I believe that the "pro-Palestinian/Hamas" demonstrators see themselves as not only demonstrating against Israel/Jews, but also against the "establishment/government". Ironic, isn't it, that their beef (the same one against countless generations of college/university students have demonstrated) is in favour of an establishment whose control over the people has been unlike anything they've ever experienced. This is but the latest manifestation of bigotry, which is rampant in all societies, but kept under wraps in a "politically correct" society. The non politically-correct commonly talked about forms of bigotry are racism, religious intolerance, sexism, intolerance of gender expression, but we all know about fat-shaming, disdain of the physically infirm, developmentally challenged, snobbery against the poor and uneducated...all this to say, no, I don't see a society needing shared values, just the wisdom to tolerate the "other" because they too are God's creations, and none of us are wise enough to judge God's plan.
I agree that we need acceptance of the other side's right to its own opinion as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others to enjoy theirs. Today's protests are depriving Jewish students and faculty members from attending classes and Jewish businesses and temples from serving the community. Tolerance ends where intolerance begins.
I think what I'm getting at is that all human beings carry prejudices...based on life experiences, teachings, media, books. Because of that, a society can't have the same values at that level: some people may have a fear of men, of boys, of blacks, of whites, of sick people, of cops, of politicians, of doctors, of "the system", of Muslims, of Jews, of priests, of LGBTQ people...it goes on. Everyone has a responsibility to be an "ambassador" for the best they represent. If they think that "best" is to hurt of even eradicate others, then clearly they are no better than common criminals. So, I think I'm saying the same as you, but with an added nuance...struggling to define "values".
I like this article about values, and think you’ve hit the nail on the head. If these values are up for ‘renegotiation’ then we now have a problem with the social contract. And that’s is a really big problem!!
Indeed. Values take time and consensus to gell and must be shared by all if a society is to function.
I agree that in this highly divided society we need positive ties that bind.