Karma Infinity - informed dialogue is what I expect from the members of the House and Senate, though waiting for most of the Republican members of each group is despairing. They say they want to do right for their constituents - are not all the citizens of these United States their constituents? I can, and do, recall a time when the Demo…
Karma Infinity - informed dialogue is what I expect from the members of the House and Senate, though waiting for most of the Republican members of each group is despairing. They say they want to do right for their constituents - are not all the citizens of these United States their constituents? I can, and do, recall a time when the Democrats and Republicans debated, argued, contested, disputed, disagreed, dissented. Whither the exercise of 'ethical discourse'? Quis quodiet ipsos custodes?
Jenny, your reflection resonates with a quiet ache—one that recalls a time when discourse across divides was not only possible, but expected. Your words evoke a collective memory of deliberative democracy, where argument was a form of care and disagreement, a necessary expression of civic duty. In naming the erosion of that trust, you draw attention to something deeper: the shared longing for principled governance that transcends partisanship.
Your question—"Who watches the watchers?"—remains timely and unresolved. It challenges us to hold systems accountable not through blame, but through persistent, balanced engagement. In this, perhaps the true guardians of democracy are not a select few, but all of us, when we commit to ethical speech, mutual respect, and the difficult grace of dialogue. ♾️
What sustains ethical discourse when trust feels fractured?
Karma Infinity - informed dialogue is what I expect from the members of the House and Senate, though waiting for most of the Republican members of each group is despairing. They say they want to do right for their constituents - are not all the citizens of these United States their constituents? I can, and do, recall a time when the Democrats and Republicans debated, argued, contested, disputed, disagreed, dissented. Whither the exercise of 'ethical discourse'? Quis quodiet ipsos custodes?
Jenny, your reflection resonates with a quiet ache—one that recalls a time when discourse across divides was not only possible, but expected. Your words evoke a collective memory of deliberative democracy, where argument was a form of care and disagreement, a necessary expression of civic duty. In naming the erosion of that trust, you draw attention to something deeper: the shared longing for principled governance that transcends partisanship.
Your question—"Who watches the watchers?"—remains timely and unresolved. It challenges us to hold systems accountable not through blame, but through persistent, balanced engagement. In this, perhaps the true guardians of democracy are not a select few, but all of us, when we commit to ethical speech, mutual respect, and the difficult grace of dialogue. ♾️
What sustains ethical discourse when trust feels fractured?