Increasingly, I find that the topics which are the most in the news, and which often mean a great deal to me (Ukraine, Climate Change, Trans Rights, Free Speech, The Role of Government, Abortion, Religion,  etc. etc.) simply can't be reduced to a short back and forth. They really require a sustained, civil exchange of ideas, where scoring points isn't rewarded, but an honest attempt to understand the other person's perspective and hopefully have a better grasp of the truth is. You might recall that two and a half years ago, my friendship of almost 60 years ended when my close friend and his wife promptly fled my backyard. This was not long after the George Floyd murder and protests. Understandably, emotions were close to the surface.  I pushed back when my friend advocated for the burning of buildings as well as abolishing the police. At some point I brought up the issue of out of wedlock births as being an enormous problem in all communities, irrespective of race. Additionally, I used the term "black on black" violence as opposed to intra-racial violence... and that was the final straw. He promptly told his wife that they have to leave. There was more to the story of course but we had a real failure of conversation that day. These flash points sometimes arise out of nowhere. I subsequently penned a 5-page letter to my friend explaining my thoughts, elaborating on my positions but I never received a response. Perhaps a civil, sustained, in-depth conversation is too much for Americans, perhaps we just want the emotional release provided by explosive utterances. Perhaps the pull of one's tribal identity doesn't allow for nuance or dissent within one's own group. It's easy to rail against the other side but to find fault with your fellow travelers, well, that would be blasphemy, and that leads to excommunication. 

Peter T.