Many people claim that increased use of the internet has contributed to heightened partisanship in national politics. The theory goes that an online visitor can seek out voices that agree with her own opinion, and quickly find herself in an “echo chamber” where her point of view is only reinforced and hardened into an extreme version of itself. This happens on both sides of the political spectrum. And not only that, but the absurdity of these extreme chambers of thought successfully drive away any centrist, moderate, or compromising individuals, leaving only the insanity to escalate unchecked. But can it be that bad?

I know of bloggers that embrace other points of view, and will even recognize and acknowledge the validity of an opposing argument. Sure, if there are places to go online that turn into “echo chambers” of like thought there are places to go that open debate is allowed. But unfortunately what tends to happen is that these open forums are invaded by people with obstinate opinions, and attacks shift from the issues to the personalities, and that open forum is burned down by the “flamers” that can’t carry a reasonable conversation. Once the flamers take over, they drive rational individuals out, and the forum has been lost.

A perfect example of this on a micro level is our neighborhood association listserve. Through a controversial issue (Walmart moving nearby) passions have been whipped up, bizarre and inappropriate actions have been taken by both sides of the issue, and the listserve has deteriorated to nothing but a name-calling playground. It has driven away the reasonable voices for fear of retaliation, and we are now at a stalemate.

We as a wired world cannot let this happen. We cannot relinquish the greatest communication tool ever invented to the hotheads and tantrum-throwers and walk away. There are ways to keep this from happening, if we rational, reasonable souls can unite. One example of a moderated solution is to have a forum with peer reviewers - where before I can post two random members of the group review my thoughts and filter them for inappropriate content and then give the ok. It may require a little more work, but isn’t civility worth it?

I bring this to everyone’s attention only because I care. I want a reasonable, compromising voice to help us make the world a better place, not just a place that either agrees with more or is the enemy. Why can’t we all just get along? Help me with this.