keeping our eyes in our heads

One of the things I miss about flying is getting to know the person sitting next to me.

Bill Buckley reportedly said: "Ninety-nine out of a hundred people are interesting. The other one is interesting because he is different."

I have certainly found that to be true with my cabin mates. Everyone has a tale to tell, and I have learned a lot by just getting to know new people for the short hours it takes to get from airport to airport.

In 2016, I was on a flight from Portland to Los Angeles on my way home to Mexico. The youngish man sitting next to me was engrossed in a book when I sat down. I waited until he put it down and introduced myself. He responded in kind: "Nice to meet you. Ruben Navarette." He paused for a moment to see if the name meant anything to me. It didn't.

During the flight, I discovered he was a newspaper columnist. I probably had read some of his pieces, but I had no idea what his politics were.

We started talking about one of our mutual favorite topics -- immigration. I had just read a series of books and articles on the topic -- including Jorge Castañeda's Ex Mex: From Migrants to Immigrants, that had given me an entirely new set data to analyze immigration from Mexico to The States.

We had probably talked about immigration for close to an hour when he informed me, in addition to column, he also had a podcast, and  he wanted to know if I would like to be interviewed. Even though I was intrigued by the idea, I told him I had no qualifications other than regurgitating what I had recently read. He laughed. "How would that be any different than any Talking Head?" You have to like someone that sardonic.

Since then, I have read his column whenever I see it. Sometimes, I agree with his position. Most often, I do not. But he always makes me think about the topic -- often through new analytical tools. I am far more interested in the path than I am in the conclusion. THat is probably why I find George Will's writing so compelling.

This morning, I was pleased to discover Navarette's column in the morning newspaper. His subject matter was not what grabbed my attention. What looked like a throwaway line in the fourth paragraph turned out to be the hook that drew me in.

[E]ven my actual best friends and I don't agree on everything. I'm old school. Back in the day -- before social media taught us to "unfriend" those who think differently -- you didn't have to agree with someone to be their friend.

I do not know when it began, but I have noticed a rash of "total unfriending" among people I know. Tempers have become so raw over the virus, politics, and whether ketchup on hot dogs is evidence of moral degradation that long-time friends have split the proverbial sheets. 

A woman I have known here for at least a decade and I had a conversation on the topic this week. I had not seen her recently in the social circles with which I associate her. When I asked her why, she informed me she would not associate with people who had politics that differed from hers. The way she worded it, I knew there was nothing left to discuss.

I found that a bit sad. Like Navarette, I disagree with most of my best friends on a lot of topics. Some of my best conversations have been with atheists, socialists, and anti-immigrationists. Even though their views are not mine, I always learn something new. Probably because we argue interests instead of positions.

The trick, of course, is that we respect one another. And, because we do, we can focus on the intellectual joy of working through ideas and concepts. Hatred cannot get a foothold with that respect.

For the first time since I started Mexpatriate back in 2007, I have been forced to make a decision to ban a commenter. And it was a tough decision because he always had an interesting bit of information to add to discussions. Unfortunately, he also had a tendency to personalize issues in a manner that evidenced itself in personal attacks, attacks that have caused several readers to complain. Eventually, he made one too many Larry-Grey-at-the-dinner-party slurs.

Buckley and Navarette are correct. People are interesting, and the best friends are people with whom we can disagree and from whom we can learn.

That is one of the joys of being adult. Reverting to the toxic social hierarchy of junior high does none of us any good.

Mahatma Gandhi seems to have a good contribution to almost any discussion. I suspect this is how he would sum up this "defriending" culture (even though he probably never said it): "An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind."  
 
Here's looking at you.