Outrage Fatigue

I have a friend who sends me political snippets and action alerts.  Sometimes a dozen or so a day. And they are all good causes. But it's too much, and too scatter-shot.

I finally made a filter just for her, and once a week or so I look to see what she's sent. And then I delete most of them. She is so outraged, and so willing to find a dastardly conspiracy behind everything, that I have to stop listening. Remember the story of the boy who cried wolf?

That may be the point. This interesting blog  (pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com) proposes that at least some of the outrageous proposed legislation is being proposed just to provoke outrage. Yelling on both sides just makes the uncommitted public tune out the argument. "They're both equally bad, and equally at fault," they think.

If you are a minority party, this is a good, albeit risky, strategy. Risky, because you don't want to energize the uncommitted. You want them so uncommitted that they won't vote.

The committed opponents won't vote for you anyway. But you may fracture their solidarity. You can bring up issues that are contentious even within their ranks. By carefully framing the issues so that some react with extreme outrage, you may get the moderates to distance themselves from the extremists. The moderates may give up in disgust if their colleagues start sounding like conspiracy theorists. Or they may simply become confused by the shouting. Either way, if you can split them, you will be closer to gaining a majority come voting day.

Once in power, you can drop the extreme proposals. You can do it under the guise of being misunderstood at the start, or you can say you are being responsive to the constituency. You never need to say it was all just a ploy to start with.

The moral for us on the other side: don't fall into the outrage trap. If the issues are being provocatively addressed, don't rise to the bait.  Recognize that in many cases there is a real concern being addressed. Respectfully consider what is being proposed, and answer intelligently. Point out an alternative solution to the concern, rather than just reacting violently to their proposal.

This isn't a game. It's not a matter of winners and losers. They are not unalloyed evil, we are not unalloyed good. Both sides want what they think is best for this country. I happen to think that their vision is corrupted by entrenched special interests and a selfish lack of empathy for others. They probably think mine is starry-eyed and unrealistic. But in the end, we will all be travelling this road together.