I'm curious what people think before attempting to post on material that I know is important but it is also complex, big and not going to be easily digestible. Especially not by those who are polarized already and think that they have their finger on the target.
And I include myself in the polarization camp. The only difference is that over the decades I have been fortunate enough to pull back for a second look when I suspect a reexamination is due.
It is like the old onion argument. You get through some layers, think you are at the core only to later figure out that well shit, bunch of more layers to go.
Focus on making the trains run on time, and welcome them into the fold when they come around to your way of thinking once you succeed.
You missed the beyond reproach part
I didn't miss it: I simply think the overwhelming majority of them disappear once you make the trains run on time. Lot of people can't be convinced by words but are convinced by results.
How to deal with the few holdouts? I don't know, because to talk about such things is to talk about something that may not even happen in my lifetime, and that are heavily dependent on the circumstances of the time and people involved.
There’s a difference between holdouts and zealots, that’s the better way to phrase it.