Ann wanted to know why I'm asserting she admits the New York Times is biased against Republicans.
I agree that the New York Times is generally biased against Republicans. Not always and in every article, because I have read Op-Ed Columnists in NYT who have argued that McCain would be a better President than Obama or Clinton. But generally, yes, the NYT is biased against Republicans.
But is the Republican point of view the only one that is worth considering? Aren't there other, legitimate points of view as well?
How many Republican Americans are there in the first place? Right now, my impression is that those who are ready to vote for the Republicans make up less than 50% of the American people. Of course, I may be wrong about that. So for the sake of the argument, let's say that 60% of the American people are ready to vote for the Republicans. Ah, but now you must remember that dozens of millions of Americans don't vote at all, even though they would have the right to. Usually, only about 60% of Americans vote. Disregarding the fact that millions of Americans haven't got the right to vote - because they are too young, for example - let's say that all the 300 million Americans would be allowed to vote, but only 60% choose to do so. That means that only 180 million Americans vote. Of those, let's say that 60% vote for the Republicans. That would mean that only 108 million Americans are really and truly Republicans, and almost 200 million Americans are not (or at least, they choose not to prove that they are). If almost 200 million Americans may be "not Republicans", doesn't that mean it is legitimate to consider all these people's points of view, without necessarily always comparing their views with Republican beliefs and the Republican agenda?
I said that maybe a little more than a hundred million Americans can be considered true Republicans. How many people are there in the world? Six billion? Seven billion? If there are a hundred million Republican Americans and six billion human beings altogether, then Republicans make up about 2% of the world's population. All these other 98% of the people will have their own points of view, their own reasons. Must everything these 98% say and believe in always be compared with what 2% hold to be true?
Roger, you are a conservative Republican. Not only that, but you are a very knowledgeable, articulate person. Of course you know why you believe in the things you believe in. Of course you believe in your own point of view. How can I ask you give up your beliefs? I am no more likely to convert you than you are to convert me. You and I both know why we believe in the things we believe in. Both of us have the right to believe that we are right.
But if you ask me, both of us should acknowledge that there
are people out there who are not like us. The world is full of people who are not like us. They have their reasons and their points of view, too. None of us should say that any media that disagrees with you or with me is hopelessly biased and should be dismissed out of hand. In fact, I would say that every media in this world is biased. Because if it wasn't, it would give a fair and balanced view of all the concerns of all of humanity. What media does that? Not a single one does. How could it?
We all have our favorite media. We have found the media which reflect our views. There is nothing wrong about the fact that we want to hear our own ideas spelled out to us more articulate than we could do ourselves. There is absolutely nothing wrong about having a conviction! And there is nothing wrong about wishing to have one's own conviction strengthened. But indeed, yes, I do think it is wrong to conclude that everyone who disagrees with one's own conviction must be wrong by definition.
I'm not trying to push the idea that any political idea is as good as any other. Believe me, I'm not! I think that my own beliefs are by far the best, remember? But I
am saying that if we are not prepared to listen to other people at all, and hear what they say, and try to understand why they are saying it, then we make ourselves narrow-minded, even close-minded.
I have nothing more to add. Roger, it has been very instructive to debate with you. It has been interesting and fun, and I have learnt much. So thank you very much for this debate!
Ann
