Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

Most of it is sheer exhaustion. When people talked politics in the past they weren't constantly being bombarded with outrageous political opinions and propaganda 24/7 via television shows, "news" programs, radio stations, op-ed pieces, website articles, advertisements of every stripe, and the constant stream of delusional social media posts, with most of this being actively promoted and shoved into your feeds by a content-driving algorithm that prioritizes divisive and emotionally charged things.

You talked about politics with the people around you because aside from maybe seeing a poster, reading a newspaper, or hearing a street speech in passing that was the bulk of your direct contact with it, so you wanted to share information and see what other people thought about things. Modern people have the exact opposite problem, we're constantly being flooded with what other people want us to think politically, and ultimately me ape me no like think hard all day about meaningless abstract bullshit. Same reason that office jobs drive people crazy, really.

There's also the issue that political problems now feel too big for the average person to contribute towards meaningfully. The interlocking systems of modern civilization are bloated and rotting on a scale that beggars belief, many of the elements are out of the control of even any one nation-state much less one citizen, and the whole creates the sensation of walking into your home after it's been destroyed by a natural disaster and not knowing where to begin writ large. People are being fucked, they know they're being fucked, but there's nothing reasonable to do so people tend to choose between unreasonable alternatives: apathy, hyperfocusing on petty issues they can change, radicalization, direct *cough*Luigi*cough* action.

Say: 'yes I will talk about politics' next time the kill phrase is flung your way. Explain the importance of free debate to democracy and freedom.
Tell your manager 'you are not allowed to forbid political discussion at the coffee machine in a free democracy'.
Refuse, resist, discuss!

This in particular is a double no-go for me. I'm public sector which means I'm expressly barred from any sort of partisan advocacy on the job, which extends to talking to people about my political views. You can only really get away with it when talking to someone you know well and trust to not report you (which usually also means someone with fairly congruent views, being as that people willing to live-and-let-live with folks who have radically different opinions are thin on the ground) in a fairly private setting (to avoid eavesdroppers reporting both of you).

I'm also a librarian, and our ethical code has a couple components which make politicization not only difficult but undesirable, most notably this: We distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their information resources.

It is extremely difficult for people to effectively compartmentalize themselves between personal and professional personas. Most people will let shit leak through, and that's a tremendous disservice to the people we're there for. The only viable approach is to expressly forbid issuing any sort of personal opinion on partisan politics on the job, because there will be people who try to use their position as a platform for advocacy for things other than the continued existence of public libraries, provide variable service to patrons based on expressed political beliefs, refuse or neglect to provide resources and materials for people who have opinions other than their own, intimidate people into not using services because of their beliefs, &c. They're meant to be democratic spaces where anyone can express themselves, use resources, and find informational and educational material without judgement so long as they're not directly harming others or interfering with their ability to do the same. Staff bringing personal politics to work in that situation runs counter to that mission.

[martinuzz]

I can agree with you, from your position as librarian, to refrain from political discussion with the visitors of your library to grant them a neutral place to inform themselves.
I work at a museum / exposition centre and would likewise never engage in political debate with my customers. I would however never silence any customer that does initiate debate (within boundaries of politeness and respectfulness).
But I can't agree with disallowing political debate amongst colleagues. Hey, if librarians, probably the most well read people in the world aren't even allowed to discuss politics, it's a bleak world indeed.

[Loud Whispers]

There's also the issue that political problems now feel too big for the average person to contribute towards meaningfully. The interlocking systems of modern civilization are bloated and rotting on a scale that beggars belief, many of the elements are out of the control of even any one nation-state much less one citizen, and the whole creates the sensation of walking into your home after it's been destroyed by a natural disaster and not knowing where to begin writ large. People are being fucked, they know they're being fucked, but there's nothing reasonable to do so people tend to choose between unreasonable alternatives: apathy, hyperfocusing on petty issues they can change, radicalization, direct *cough*Luigi*cough* action.

quote for fucking truth

[Flying Dice]

I can agree with you, from your position as librarian, to refrain from political discussion with the visitors of your library to grant them a neutral place to inform themselves.
I work at a museum / exposition centre and would likewise never engage in political debate with my customers. I would however never silence any customer that does initiate debate (within boundaries of politeness and respectfulness).
But I can't agree with disallowing political debate amongst colleagues. Hey, if librarians, probably the most well read people in the world aren't even allowed to discuss politics, it's a bleak world indeed.

As I said, it does happen, but only quietly when everyone involved knows and trusts each other implicitly to be reasonable. I have three colleagues that I feel I can have an honest political conversation with. Most of the remainder are good people but too emotionally invested in their views to have a rational conversation about any sensitive topics. There's also the issue that some people will eavesdrop and silently file complaints about anyone who says anything that they don't like. The work rules are as they are because the unfortunate reality is that it's impossible to staff a large organization exclusively with people who are able to have a conversation on a sensitive topic without devolving into insults or bickering (especially keeping in mind that they're written for and applied to every component of local government, not just us).

With patrons... I always make it a rule to stick to factual question and answer; any attempt to elicit political opinions or reactions just gets a flat-faced "I understand what you're saying,", "I regret that you feel that way,", "I'm afraid I can't talk about partisan politics on the clock," &c. Part of that's just good sense, part of it is from the perennial threat of people trying to get gotcha recordings that fit whatever political angle they care about.

[Loud Whispers]

Damn there is some gothic irony there. The well-informed librarian, doomed to guide others to whatever information their heart so desires, yet not always the information they need