I find the political discussions here can become hopeless and pessimistic- with a lot of talk about what's wrong in the world- which has become pretty obvious. I'm not sure I agree with all your assertions but I get the general drift. Not a lot of talk about positive developments or discussions about solutions. Can't you see them and mention them too? Like some of the things coming from pope Francis. He's getting hopeful conversations going (even if I don't agree with everything. I like him). Or do you not see anything positive happening in the world? Are there holes to poke in those too? I mean, we can always find an angle to rain on the smallest parade- but why do that? Sorry Graeme. I understand your feelings but I can't look at doom and gloom all the time. There's a cultural tug o' war going on between being set in our ways, and positive changes afoot. It's not all bad stuff though. People all over the place are waking up to doing their part to make the world a better place. Really!

I talk politics all the time. That it is now almost absent on Wondercafe is more a statement on Wondercafe and its other posters than it is a statement about my speaking on political issues. I simply find that when I want political discussion I seek it in places where I can have it without people talking past people, going on tirades, accusing folks of all kinds of things from ignorance, a lack of faith... to being a  ___ (insert anything from bleeding heart to Tea Party member to being racist, elitist, etc). It simply not my preference. I watch discussions of a political nature that do not discuss things that way. I do not read the writings of those who do things that way. I do not engage personally with those who do things that way. There needs, for me, to be a desire to deal in facts, solution potentials, critical analysis... without an overriding agenda, mud slinging, vile rhetoric and fear mongering. Some folks can do that and some cannot. Some can discuss and do so respectfully and some cannot.  As I said, I do not tend to read news articles or commentaries... watch TV news or shows.... frequent forums... from those who cannot. I also do not engage those who cannot in my personal life. So, that is my reason why I don't on Wondercafe. There are again places and people who know how often I discuss politics, but this is not that place (for me).

Some good comments SG.  Some time in the past I heard a quote something like: "liberals don't take the devil seriously enough; conservative Christians take the devil too seriously.  Some leaders under-respond to trends and events; others over-react.  Most seem to misread the many faces of evil that are diminishing what we could be.  The Western nations will experience consequences eventually for their actions of greed and violence.  But there is an exploding number of personal networks of relationships that are and will be ready to engage the results and move forward.  The US is spending more on its military adventures than it is gaining economically, and it will eventually collapse.  Canada will experience pain, but will probably survive.  If we want to have influence in political discussions, we need to build networks of relationships that go beyond politics.  No matter what happens, the world will go on; humanity will survive and explore new paths, and love will triumph in the ways that really matter.

Thinking back over the sermons I've written and delivered over recent years (I only do supply) I would say that many of them reflect concerns about economics and/or about fighting.   They have also been about love, peace, generosity, justice, and humility (things I don't find very often in our political leadership). 

I would guess that unlike other countries currency, the US dollar maintains it value by being a world's standard, much as gold was.

It seems that other countries will not turn there back on US dollar until there was something viable to replace it.

 The war the US military wages is in service of global capitalism and not US interests( howevr many think the two are the same) 

My history at the cafe includes a number of forays into the political. Based on what I read from you, graeme, you and I share similar views. However, I am avoiding most of these types of discussion because I find that many people do not have the ability to disagree with someone's ideas without attacking the person who is expressing them.

To be honest, that includes me. I don't like the feelings that being on the defensive evokes in me and, subsequent to that, my response. Perhaps I should be using it as an opportunity to develop these skills and expand my capacity for compassion but it tends to serve as a source of needless aggravation instead.

In part, I know that the (reasonably) recent information that I've read, for example The Backfire Effect about how one changes one's mind, has contributed to that. Knowing that having a respectful discussion and making well-considered points doesn't often lead people to reconsider has made me question the use of my time in this way. 

.
.
Could you explain a bit further the premise of this book?

From the website at the link for "The Backfire Effect"

"The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking.

"The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger."

wow,  really. quelle surprise.

Not here, with the invitation to be open - and then when one treads into political discussion, using the politcal thread as a means, gets slammed, effectively silencing the voice.

Well, I'm in agreement with all of the above. And I certainly agree that if we weep and wail about the condition of the world but have no altelrnatives to suggest, we are simply causing grief for us and each other. So let's start this way.

politics is simply the structures and procedures by which we establish a desirable society.

Desirable is largely defined by a moral code which varies surprisingly little from one major faith to another. If we don't immediately have the answer for every problem, we at least have workable and practical starting points in our moral codes.

Our faiths are not something separate from our worldly life. they are the practical guides to creating a lasting society.

Instead, we tend the separate our faith from oujr politics. (And please note I am not suggesting a church state. I used the word faith in a very broad implication to include almost all faiths - and to count atheists and agnostics. I have know very few of the latter who advocate murder, torture, exploitation or other common problems in our world.)

Butr we too often separate them so that business, for example, can boast the principle that greed is good and productive.

Our faiths don't exist as a closed cubicle sitting next to the closed cubicles of business and the closed cubicle of politics.

But that's what we impose on them. If I hear another "religious" discussion about whether God has grey hair, or who w ill be saved, I shall fwow up.

There's a reason for moral codes. They exist because for millenia, people have realized that socieites without them don't survive. Not coveting is not just a goody-goody thing. It's essential to a healthy society.

Separating our faiths from politics is what makes discussion of politics frustrating and negative., even fearful. That just leaves us with a faith that is nothing but abstractions, ireelvancies, and boredom.

I agree that politics is all about how we live in community with each other. In whatever society we live, our collective energy shapes how we choose our leaders. I believe this is true of totalitarian as well as those societies I would say are more truly democratic (which includes the intention to work towards a fair and egalitarian society). 

In my regular life, I have those conversations frequently. When people look each other in the eye, chances are that there will be more care taken in those conversations compared to random and anonymous contributors in cyber-space. 

Not having been on Wcafe for awhile, I'm guessing that the furor caused by Reza Aslan, a biblical scholar who is Muslim, when he appeared on FOX TV has been discussed. If not, you can watch that video here: Reza Aslan To Fox News: Yes I 'Happen To Be A Muslim,' But Wrote 'Zealot' Because I Am An Expert.

Having established who he is, I think he has a lot to offer in terms of his view that, at the time of Jesus, religion and politics were one and the same. He was the most recent guest on the CBC Radio One Program Tapestry and, for those who are interested, the podcast can be heard here: Reza Aslan on Jesus the Revolutionary.

These conversations are happening a lot in the circles in which I travel, work-wise and church-wise. I'm sorry to hear that's not the case everywhere. I am glad that you are initiating them, graeme.

Religion should always be about politics and daily life. It establishes the principles on which our politics are based.

I remember the years that I frequently spoke in synagogues in Montreal. Events were based on learning, discussing, debating. Now that I live in Moncton, the weekly faith page (entirely Christian) in the newspaper lists only pancake breakfasts and cake sales. However, this week, the Anglicans shrugged off the dust of centuries, and strode boldly in a new direction. They're going to have a goose supper.

Graeme - it happens in our church - in our study/discussion groups, and/or in our committee meetings - in our Writers' Group.  It's usually not planned.  Somebody comes in all upset or excited or passionate about pension funds or fracking or something and we discuss it.  We read a scripture passage in our study group and it reminds someone of the present situation in Syria or something and we talk about it.  Someone writes an essay about homelessness and, rather than critiquing the style of writing we discuss the problem.   This also happens in our Outreach Committee meetings - some people there are well informed and do a lot of background research concerning their topics.  So you won't see a sign out front saying "Tonights Topic is ---" but if you become involved in this church I think you might find it happening. 

I'm glad to hear it. I hope there's always someone there who can keep the discussion in the context of Christian teaching. The first time a minister told me that, not many years ago, I was annoyed that he would drag biblical teaching into it.. Then I realized that I had always done my thinking (if not my behaviour)  within a Christian context. Without realizing it, I had always been a Christian.