How to control what's in your Facebook feed

Putting some sanity around social media

On February 21, 2026February 21, 2026 By StormyIn social media1 Comment

Level Set: Before we begin it’s important that you understand a few things about Facebook…

First and foremost—Facebook doesn’t exist to make your life better or even to give you a good user experience. It exists to make money for Meta. It does this by learning as much as it can about you, and then selling access to you (via the platform) to other entities that want to reach someone with your perceived attributes.

These entities are usually businesses that want to sell you products or services, but sometimes they are organizations that want to sell you their ideology.

The platform is designed to encourage interaction to keep you on it longer in order to learn about you and have more opportunities to sell things to you. This means that it has no qualms about intentionally manipulating your emotions if getting you angry will keep you on the platform longer. Just like Phillip Morris, it wants you to become addicted to its product.

Successful FB accounts often create fake content to get people to engage. This can be heartwarming stories that simply aren’t true, to those posts that make ridiculous claims like, “Only a genius can name two cities that start with an A” (Spoiler alert, you’re not a genius for coming up with Annapolis and Anchorage), and outrageous “AITA” scenarios. They also will occasionally post things that everyone knows are false or incorrect, merely to get people to correct them (thereby engaging with their content and pushing it out to more people).

AI is also used to create fake stories and fake photos that drive engagement. Don’t comment on them and they will eventually disappear. Only tactics that people “fall for” will continue to get engagement, so if we all only engaged with legitimate content from people we know first-hand, a lot of this BS would just fade away. But as Stormy & KitKat know, that’s easier said than done. (Actually, KitKat is one of the smart ones that never adopted FB.)

NOT THE

BOUNDARY WATERS

There are also fake accounts (bots) and professional trolls whose “job” it is to drive content by engaging other commenters (sometimes by being very nasty). There are also very real trolls (maybe even friends and neighbors) who find themselves so provoked by this content that they lash out in ways that they wouldn’t in real life.

Here’s an example of that last point: While I was doing some research, I came across an old article (dated 2018) informing people that FB had them categorized by political view. If you follow the instructions in the article, you’ll see that this categorization has disappeared—no doubt due to pressure over social media algorithms skewing information during the 2020 election. (I have a ChatGPT conversation that I’ll include at the end of this article, if you’re interested in learning more. It basically confirms what I already suspected. It’s no longer an option, but we’re all still being categorized politically.)

Following are step-by-step instructions for gaining a little more control over what’s in your feed.

Note: These are instructions are for those using Facebook on a desktop (as it’s much easier to work on a larger screen). If you don’t have a desktop, I’m sure you can do these same maneuvers on a tablet or mobile, but the experience is likely different, so you’ll need to experiment.)

Clicking on “Content preferences” will bring you to the screen below. Here you can click on “Political content” and toggle it OFF if you don’t want to see so many political posts in your feed. (YAY!)

Next, click on Content Preferences and toggle off Political Content.

Likewise, you can also toggle “Sensitive content” off if you don’t want your feed to include other disturbing content. Note: If you DO want to see political posts from certain trusted sources, just include those in your Favorites, which you will learn about next.

Bypass the System… for real

Remember the viral FB hoax about how you could “Bypass the system” by copying and pasting some verbiage into your post in order to stop seeing the same 25 people in your feed? (Note: Anything instructing you to copy/paste words in order to either change your authority over or privacy on FB is completely bogus. That’s not how the platform works.)

Well, the post was right about one thing: There is an algorithm at play that is controlling whose posts you see most regularly, but the magic number is actually 30. You can find out who these 30 are by clicking on “Favorites.”

You’ll notice that these are the same people or pages that pop up in your feed most frequently and that they change slowly over time. Here’s why: Facebook, by default, “chooses” these based on how frequently you interact with their posts (like, comment, etc.) and—this is important—also how “new” of a FB friend they are. (This is because FB is trying to “cement” your new relationship. Isn’t that thoughtful? 🙄)

If you’ve been on FB a while, you likely have old friends and family members that you added years ago. Unfortunately, if you’re hoping to keep up with what’s going on in their lives via social media, FB is going to instead show you posts by the woman in your yoga class whose friend request you accepted last week.

Click on Favorites to see which pages and people FB is prioritizing in your feed.

Here, under “Favorites,” you can legitimately bypass the system by designating your own favorites.

I’m not sure how long FB will honor your choices, but this should work at least temporarily. However, (because I don’t trust FB and neither should you), I would assume that as you add new friends or interact with new pages, they will incrementally be added to your Favorites and some of your previously designated Favorites may fall off.

And now, let’s tackle those pesky ads…

Okay, now you should still be in the “Settings & privacy” section, but instead of clicking on “Content preferences,” we’re now going to click on “Settings” at the top of the menu.

Now, go out of Content Preferences and click on Settings at the top of the menu.

This brings us to a more extensive “Settings & privacy” section. Note the “Meta Accounts Center” box at the left. Click on the blue link.

This will bring up the Settings section. Look at the menu on the left and click on the blue link.

Here is where it gets interesting. Click on “Ad preferences” and look at the tab labeled “Customize ads.” Scroll down on this page and you’ll see what FB has designated as your preferences based on past interactions with ads. There is also a list of “Ad topics,” and you can individually select whether or not you want to see “less of” products related to each category.

Note that you have to select them one at a time and it’s a long list. You also can’t opt to not see them at all…just less. (Two more reasons I hate FB.)

Click on Ad Preferences and then Customize Ads

Now we’re going to click on the “Manage Info” tab. This will bring up a long list of all the categories used to target ads to you. You can opt out of these categories (again, you have to do it one-by-one).

Below are all the categories I removed myself from!

Next, go to the Manage Info tab. Here you can opt-out of targeting by various topics.

It’s also worth noting that FB gets a lot wrong in its assumptions. For example, it had me in categories related to “living away from my family” and “away from my hometown.” Both Oskar and I are originally from the Twin Cities area, and neither of us have ever lived anywhere else!

Lastly, you can click on the “waffle” (menu), which will bring up this screen.

Click on the waffle on the top menu and on the left you'll see an option to view your Feeds.

If you then click on “Feeds,” you can see the one marked “Friends.” This is where you’ll see ALL of your friend posts (beyond just the “Favorites”) without all the random posts for groups or pages that FB thinks you might be interested in.

However, you’ll notice there are still ads/sponsored posts mixed in among them. (Sigh.)

What now?

If you’ve followed these instructions, you should now have a little more control over your feed. Although you probably realize that your control is limited and possibly temporary. The best advice I can give you is to revisit these pages occasionally. See what’s new and what has changed. But even better advice is to retain some healthy skepticism when using FB and limit your use.

A deeper dive – A conversation with ChatGPT about Facebook targeting

Prompt: A 2018 Thrillist article (https://www.thrillist.com/tech/nation/facebook-ads-classify-users-political-views-how-to-change) cites Facebook classifying users but the designation mentioned in the article no longer exists. When did Facebook change it and why?

Chat GPT Response: Here’s what happened with the “you’re labeled as liberal/conservative” political-view classification Facebook used to show in your Ad Preferences — the setting Thrillist described in 2018 — and when and why it changed:

📉 What the Thrillist Article Was Describing (2018)

In 2018 Facebook did infer users’ political leanings (e.g., “Very Liberal,” “Moderate,” or “Conservative”) and put those in a user’s Ad Preferences page based on activity and inferred interests. That let advertisers see and (in some cases) targetusers using related interest categories.

That inference category was part of a broader set of “Detailed Targeting” attributes Facebook assigned to user profiles based on their behavior, likes, page interactions, and inferred interests.

🗓 When Did Facebook Remove That Type of Classification?

Facebook (now Meta) began removing the ability for advertisers to target users based on inferred political views and other sensitive categories in late 2021 / early 2022.

Key points:

In November 2021, Meta announced it would eliminate ad targeting options related to “sensitive” characteristics— including political affiliation, religion, sexual orientation, race, and health issues.
These changes went into effect on January 19, 2022. Targeting options tied to interests like political ideology and beliefs were removed from the Detailed Targeting menu in Meta Ads Manager.
Ads already running with those targeting options continued for a transitional period, but after March 17, 2022, Meta fully stopped serving ads using those removed categories.

This means by early 2022, the political-leaning interest categories that Thrillist showed users how to find were no longer available for advertisers, and related profile labels were no longer displayed in the same way.

🤔 Why Did Facebook Remove It?

Meta said the change was intended to reduce the misuse and abuse of ad-targeting features — especially categories that could be perceived as sensitive, discriminatory, or open to manipulation. Advertisers could discriminate or spam users by targeting too precisely on topics like politics or religion.

The company responded to input from:

Civil-rights groups
Policymakers concerned about discrimination
Media reports like ProPublica showing misuse of targeting tools

Meta’s official reasoning was that removing these targeting options would protect users and avoid the negative externalities associated with overly granular targeting based on personal attributes.

📌 What This Change Means Today

Users no longer see political-view labels (like “conservative” or “liberal”) in Ad Preferences the way the 2018 article described.
Advertisers can still run political ads (in most regions), but they can’t target audiences based on inferred political ideology or other “sensitive” categories using those old interest flags.
Meta has instead shifted toward broader targeting and algorithmic delivery, relying more on machine learning signals rather than explicit detailed categories. (This shift is ongoing, and many advertisers notice that “interest” categories have faded in importance or been consolidated.)

Summary:
Facebook’s ability to classify users by a political-view label that advertisers could see was effectively phased out starting in late 2021, with the changes fully implemented around early 2022, because Meta removed “sensitive” Detailed Targeting options (including political affiliation) after concerns about abuse and discrimination.

If you’d like, I can also explain how Facebook/Meta still infers user traits today (even without explicit targeting options) and what that means for ad delivery and personalization.

Stormy’s Prompt: Yes, please do.

Great — this is where it gets more nuanced.

Even though Meta removed explicit “sensitive” targeting categories (like political affiliation) from advertiser menus in early 2022, that does not mean Meta stopped inferring user traits. It changed how those inferences are used and exposed.

Here’s how it works now:

1️⃣ Explicit Labels vs. Machine Learning Prediction

Before 2022:

Advertisers could select categories like “Very Liberal” or “Conservative” in Detailed Targeting.
Those were explicit interest buckets visible in Ads Manager.

After 2022:

Those explicit categories were removed.
But Meta still uses machine learning models to predict user behavior and engagement patterns — including political engagement tendencies — for ad delivery optimization.

In other words:

❌ Advertisers can’t select “Conservative voters.”
✅ Meta’s algorithm can still learn who is likely to engage with a given political message.

The classification hasn’t disappeared — it’s just moved from a manual targeting tool to a black-box optimization system.]

2️⃣ How Meta Infers Traits Today

Meta builds predictive models using signals such as:

Pages you follow
Posts you engage with
Videos you watch (including how long)
Groups you join
Ads you click
Off-platform browsing data (via Meta Pixel / Conversions API)
Demographic and geographic data

From those signals, the system predicts things like:

Likelihood to click political content
Likelihood to donate
Issue interest (climate, immigration, gun rights, etc.)
Likelihood to share partisan content

Even if “political affiliation” isn’t a selectable targeting category, the delivery system can still optimize ads toward users who historically respond to certain political themes.

3️⃣ The Shift: From “Targeting” to “Optimization”

Meta has publicly framed this as a move away from “sensitive targeting.”

In practice, what changed is:

Old model (pre-2022):

Advertiser manually picks interest categories.
Targeting is transparent and discrete.

New model (2022–present):

Advertiser chooses broad audiences.
Meta’s AI decides who within that audience sees the ad based on predicted response.

This is called algorithmic delivery optimization.

So while a campaign can’t say “show this to conservatives,” it can:

Upload a donor list (Custom Audience)
Ask for a “Lookalike Audience”
Optimize for “engagement” or “donations”

The system then finds people who behave similarly — which can strongly correlate with political identity.

4️⃣ What This Means for Political Advertising

For political advertisers specifically:

Meta still allows political ads in the U.S.
Advertisers must go through identity verification.
Ads are stored in the public Ad Library.
Detailed targeting based on “sensitive” interests is prohibited.

However:

Broad targeting + optimization often recreates segmentation patterns.
Researchers have found algorithmic delivery can produce partisan sorting even without explicit targeting inputs.

That’s a key distinction regulators are still wrestling with.

5️⃣ Are Political “Scores” Still Assigned Internally?

Meta has not publicly confirmed maintaining explicit ideological labels like “Very Liberal” in the same way users once saw in Ad Preferences.

But:

The system must internally model engagement likelihood.
That modeling necessarily involves behavior patterns that correlate strongly with political ideology.
In machine learning terms, ideology may function as a latent variable — even if it’s no longer a visible category.

So while the label disappeared, predictive inference likely did not.

6️⃣ Why Meta Made This Shift

There were three main pressures:

Civil rights concerns (discrimination via targeting)
Political backlash after 2016 and 2020 elections
Regulatory scrutiny (U.S. and EU)

By removing explicit “sensitive” targeting options, Meta could argue it reduced the risk of discriminatory ad targeting — while preserving performance-based ad delivery.

7️⃣ The Big Structural Reality

This is the core tension:

Removing explicit categories does not eliminate predictive inference in AI-driven advertising systems.

Modern ad platforms don’t need labeled buckets — they predict behavior directly.

Is the problem guns or mental illness?

On August 28, 2025September 2, 2025 By StormyIn Attitude, Children, Faith, PoliticsLeave a comment

The answer is “Yes”!

KitKat lives down the street from the horrific shooting at Annunciation School and Church yesterday. We were scheduled to play pickleball at 11, and she texted me in the morning to tell me there was a live shooter at the school. Since KitKat works from home, she could hear constant sirens as multiple cop cars and ambulances were racing to the scene.

View of Annunciation School and church with multiple police cars and officers outside. — _{Courtesy NBC News}

I had just called her to learn more when her phone started blowing up with messages from friends and family calling to see if she was okay. She told me all her doors were locked, blinds drawn, etc., and said she’d call me back.

I hung up and immediately went to BlueSky to see if I could find out more as the shooting was happening in real time. One post caught my eye. It said something like, “Another school shooting. This time in Minneapolis. Just another Wednesday in America.”

Very soon thereafter, it was confirmed that the shooter was dead. I breathed a sigh of relief that KitKat wasn’t in danger. But for the families involved, the tragedy was still unfolding as parents arrived at the school to learn whether their child had been shot.

An hour or two later, I drove over to KitKat’s house (four miles from my home) to see how she was doing. KitKat’s youngest is a senior at a private school and her school went into lockdown as well. Meanwhile, my three kids have all made it safely through school and college—something that I don’t take for granted. (Well, Blossom is currently in vet school, but she’s in another country where shootings aren’t routine.)

KitKat was still shaken to her core, even though she and her daughter were both “safe.” She worried about which of her neighbor kids may have been injured or worse. She felt the terror the other parents were going through. Of course, her reaction was totally normal, since this kind of incident could trigger PTSD for any parent.

Me, I didn’t feel sadness, so much as anger. This trauma and pain is avoidable. We are the ONLY country in the world that has this issue. Every other civilized country has figured it out. The solution for eliminating mass shootings is not rocket science. Other countries have done it successfully, and all we have to do is follow their example. The solution is sensible gun control. We can still allow citizens to have hunting rifles and handguns to protect their homes and property, but in a controlled and monitored way so that instruments of mass death don’t fall into the hands of the wrong people. It’s a no-brainer, and yet we continue to make excuses while more children die.

Which brings me to my next point: Excuses. Online, a gun-rights advocate was telling me that guns aren’t the issue, mental illness is. Specifically, he posted, “The root cause is that person was sick and mentally unwell. They could have drove a car into a crowded area. You are making this about politics.”

Okay, let’s unpack that mental illness excuse a bit.

First off, other countries have mentally ill people. But they don’t have rampant gun violence. As I pointed out to the online poster, a gun is a much more efficient killing machine than a car, a knife, or a blunt object—and it is designed solely for that purpose. That makes it uniquely deadly and without any other utility (such as an airplane) that helps to justify its existence or accessibility. (And, let me mention here that I could have added that cars and planes are pretty well-regulated, but I left that part out.) So, yes, I am adamant that guns are still the root cause of mass shootings. A mentally ill person that is hell-bent on taking out others can do much more damage, more quickly, with an easily accessible gun than they can with other easily accessible objects.

Now let’s talk about mental illness itself. It very well may be that we have greater numbers of mentally ill people than other countries. I wouldn’t doubt it. The pandemic launched a mental health crisis in this country that we have yet to recover from, and record numbers of young people are experiencing anxiety, depression and self-harm. There have been several causes identified: the pandemic, increased social media use, etc., but I think the real cause is more sinister and pervasive. I believe it’s because so many people lack confidence in a viable future.

When I was a child and teenager, my worldview was formed by my family, teachers, religious leaders, the law, media and society. That worldview went something like this:

Family: My parents want the best for me. My siblings care about me.
Teachers: My teachers want me to succeed and get a good education, so I can get a decent job and be a functioning member of society.
Religious Leaders: God/Jesus loves me and wants me to live a good life in the service of others.
The Law: Police are there to help me if something bad happens. The legal system is uncorrupt, “no man is above the law,” and justice will ultimately prevail.
Media: The media is honest and journalists have integrity.
Society: Most adults are trustworthy and smart. They know what to do and can be trusted to do the right thing. Americans love their country and will defend freedom and the rights of others.

Yes, you can see from this worldview that I had a pretty privileged upbringing, and I realize not everyone has had that experience. However, I think most of us grew up generally believing that the adults in charge actually knew what they were doing and were generally acting responsibly.

As I got older, of course, I realized that wasn’t always the case. But that realization dawned on me gradually—until 2016, when it hit me like a ton of bricks: Donald Trump was so obviously an arrogant idiot, and yet, enough people believed in him to actually elect him as president?! This shook up my worldview. But by this time, I was already 50—an adult with a fully formed brain, an MBA, healthcare coverage and significant savings. In other words, I had resources to cope.

And then came the pandemic, J6, George Floyd, the 2024 election… I witnessed many, many adults that I previously would have considered decent people do the indecent thing. I saw people refuse to wear a mask to protect their neighbors. I saw people refuse to get vaccinated so our country could return to normal. I saw neighbors spread disinformation. I saw people I went to high school with make racist and homophobic remarks about others. I saw siblings defend rioters and killers. Online, I saw a cop—casually kneeling on a man’s neck while he struggled to breathe—and saw many other people defending that heinous action. I know adults who elected a rapist. Adults that voted for people who pose with semi-automatic rifles on their Christmas card, while children continue to get gunned down in school. I saw too many religious leaders (thankfully, none of my own) subverting Christ’s message about loving thy neighbor and instead preaching condemnation and dominion over others.

All of this has been very difficult and painful to reconcile, but I’ve sadly and slowly come to the conclusion that there are far fewer decent people in this world (or at least our country) than I had previously believed. Still, I have a lot more life experience with which to process this information than the average teenager or young adult.

So now, let’s look at the US through the lens of that young person whose brain is still developing: What they are seeing is a deeply divided country. Adults who aren’t trust-worthy being put in charge. Technology that is advancing far more quickly than our ability to put guardrails around it. Uncertainty regarding what is actually human or AI when interacting online. Billionaires being exempted from paying taxes while the number of homeless grows. The media openly lies despite lawsuits. Government leaders lie while under oath. Parents and classmates who align politically with those who advocate harm for their immigrant classmates. The Supreme Court is rolling back rights for women and LGBTQ people. Out-of-control housing costs and inflation that will make it impossible to have a decent standard of living once they are out on their own. Corporate CEOs sacrificing our planet for greed. Widespread confusion about which careers will even be viable five or ten years from now.

Our country is a shit-show. It’s no wonder that many young people have a nihilistic, angry view of the world. I do, too, frankly. As I mentioned earlier, I just have better coping mechanisms. The difference is that young people have only seen the chaos. Whereas, I know that a lot of it can be fixed. Not everything, sadly (particularly as it pertains to our climate), but a lot of it. And yes, it will take a long time to set things right, but I can see a better future out there for them—and for all of us—if we just work together to achieve it.

This is what young people so desperately need: Belief in a better future and confidence that the adults who surround them will work alongside them to help secure it. Getting MAGA out of office and appropriately taxing billionaires will allow us to get this country back on track, but we can’t wait for someone else to fix the problem.

Until we all commit to securing that better future, the lethal combination of mental illness and accessible firearms will continue to devastate our communities.

The Irresistibility of Jesus and Democracy

On January 14, 2021November 14, 2024 By StormyIn Faith, PoliticsLeave a comment

I swore to myself that I would move on from politics and start posting about other pressing matters, but after last week’s siege on the Capitol as the grand finale of the #StopTheSteal rally, I had one last thought (or maybe it’s two thoughts?) that I wanted to share.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m deeply disturbed by the number of so-called Christians that have been supporting 45, particularly those who continue to support him even after last week’s insurrection. I understand that many of them claim their pro-life beliefs compel them to support the Republican party, and that the end justifies the means. But unlike the boats that sank in this summer’s Trump parade, that argument doesn’t hold water. At this point, supporting Trump for his anti-abortion stance is akin to excusing those who kill abortion doctors because they’re sacrificing one life for many. The right-wing violence demonstrated over the last week shows that these self-proclaimed pro-lifers are now aligning themselves with the very types of people they claim to oppose.

The end does not justify the means. Period.

The “Christian” segment of Trump supporters is led by the white, evangelical Christians. I’ve always been leery of evangelists, because in my experience many of them focus on the wrong things—turning evangelism into a contest for salvation points or, worse, using it as a get-rich-quick scheme. (Incidentally, for a really thorough and thoughtful discussion on evangelism, I recommend this article.) For my agnostic friends who aren’t inclined to read that, I’ll put it more simply: I believe that the absolute, most-effective method of evangelism is not just to share Jesus’s words, but to model his behavior. It seems obvious, but it’s rarely done. Instead, I’ve found that many Evangelicals focus on more obscure parts of the Bible to try to browbeat the “unchurched” into submission. Case in point: Do you realize that Jesus never said one word related to LGBTQIA-related issues or abortion? Nope. He did, however, very clearly instruct us to love our neighbors as ourselves. I don’t believe Jesus wants abortions to happen, but I believe he wants us to solve that problem through compassion and by taking care of one another—not through fines and penalties. He gave us the tools we need to solve the problem using cooperation, kindness and generosity. All we have to do is get to work.

This browbeating—which is increasingly being reinforced with physical violence—is one of the many ways that Christians who support Trump are actually driving people AWAY from Christ. And they will need to answer to Jesus for that, because that’s the exact opposite of what he commanded.

Granted, aspiring to live like Christ may be difficult task, but it’s also the only sure-fire way to draw people to him. His example on this earth—and the fact that he’s still such a large part of our daily conversation two thousand years later—is a testament to his “irresistibility.” The truth is, it’s hard to resist the overwhelming pull of compassion that Jesus demonstrated: feeling understood, being challenged to be the best version of yourself, yet knowing that you are forgiven for your short-comings and are still a beloved Child of God. Who wouldn’t be drawn to that kind of energy? The unfortunate reason more people haven’t experienced that is because most Christians are really bad about actually living Christ’s example. (I include myself in that indictment, although I continue to try my best.)

In other words, I think Evangelicals should stop haranguing people to accept Christ as their personal savior and start showing them what Jesus stood for instead. I guarantee they will win more souls for Jesus with that approach…no conversion therapy necessary.

It’s like the ridiculous, so-called “War on Christmas.” There IS no war on Christmas. Like Jesus, Christmas is too darned irresistible. That’s why you occasionally see Hindus and Jews capitulating to their children’s request for a Christmas tree. They may not embrace the Christmas story about a virgin giving birth to the Son of God (which, spoiler alert, didn’t actually occur on December 25th), but they often can’t resist the trappings: the lights, the tinsel, the carols, the sentimental movies and peace-on-earth-good-will-toward-men. The only thing that many non-Christians request of their Christian neighbors is to acknowledge that not everyone celebrates Christmas and to not react to the phrase “Happy Holidays” as though it’s a curse. Which, if you think about it, is not an unreasonable request to make of someone whose faith compels them to “do unto others as you would have done unto you.”

“America First” is a race to the bottom.

And there’s another corollary to this that applies to a troubling policy that many conservative Christians are embracing: (White) Nationalism. Jesus made it very clear that salvation was for all nations, not a select few. The USA isn’t “special” in terms of being God’s favorite—as much as it may pain some Evangelicals to hear that. Moreover, this line of thinking is short-sighted and stupid. The pandemic has shown us that no country can afford to stand alone during a time of crisis. It took researchers sharing information globally to identify the virus and how it spreads. Likewise, multiple vaccines could not have been developed in record time without international collaboration. Climate change is another example: We ALL will suffer its effects—no matter how many walls we build or security checkpoints we put in place in an attempt to secure our borders. Our economic stability is also dependent on global cooperation. In short, we need to be a nation focused on “win-win,” not “win-lose.”

“America First” is not only a misguided and dangerous philosophy, it’s also unnecessary. For those who insist it is needed to spread democracy throughout the world, I would respond that our Constitution is a beautiful, sexy thing… the envy of many. And the promise of what our democracy could be (but admittedly has not yet achieved) is nearly as irresistible—in terms of government—as Jesus is to religion. Therefore, if we can just model a democracy where all men and women are truly created equal, with equal protection under the law, and equal opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then we won’t NEED to sanction other governments in an attempt to move them toward democracy. It will happen organically. In the same interconnected world described earlier, other nations that are exposed to the freedom and justice of the United States will eventually demand the same. And the Vladimir Putins and Donald Trumps of this world will be limited in their influence and power.

We just need to focus on two tasks to bring about real change:

1. Love thy neighbor as thyself

2. Strive for equality and justice for all

The challenge before us is these are both “Easier said than done.” It may not happen overnight. However, if we rise to the challenge, I guarantee it will happen.

A Christmas wish for a better 2017

On December 20, 2016December 16, 2019 By StormyIn Attitude, Politics, Uncategorized1 Comment

I’ve been thinking about two of my favorite Christmas movies during this uncertain post-election season. Now, it’s no secret that neither KitKat nor I were rooting for our President-Elect to win. In fact, we were both plunged into a depression that required a fair amount of co-counseling—and wine—to overcome. While neither of us is resigned to a Trump presidency, we realize that we need to find a way to cope during the next four years and this post is my attempt at that.

KitKat and I are both members of the not-so-secret secret group, “Pantsuit Nation,” that’s comprised of Hillary supporters (or at least, non-Trump supporters). And in the days since the election, it’s been interesting to note that a shared conviction that Trumplethinskin is a narcissistic, evil Cheeto doesn’t necessarily mean that those who oppose him are lockstep in all of their viewpoints. There has been a fair amount of finger-pointing, liberal angst, fear and—alongside the shame and blame—also some impressive conviction and positivity.

Which brings me to my two favorite Christmas movies… These are Frank Capra’s masterpiece, “It’s a Wonderful Life,” and the musical “Scrooge,” based on Dickens’ classic, “A Christmas Carol.”

The first time I saw “It’s a Wonderful Life,” I was 21. I was at a party on Christmas Eve and sat riveted to the TV. This was partially due to my introvert nature, but also because of the movie itself—I was entranced by Jimmy Stewart’s performance. I still watch it every year and love the quirkiness of the plot: The bravery and loyalty of young George Bailey. The sauciness of Mary Hatch. The unbelievable engineering of a retractable dance floor in a high school in the 1920s. The integrity of a grown George Bailey who turns down an impressive salary from the film’s villain (but still holds onto the high-quality cigar given to him by the same)… I love George Bailey because to me he represents the millions of decent people who do the right thing day after day with no expectation of reward or fame.

However, I think the most remarkable thing about the film is the fact that—in a very un-Hollywood-like twist—the villain never gets his come-uppance! In the movie, dastardly Old Man Potter nearly gets George sent to prison for embezzlement—and although George is saved by the contributions of his many friends at the end of the film, there is no indication that Potter is ever identified as the culprit who took the missing money. There’s no denouement where Potter is indicted and sent to Sing Sing. To the contrary, we’re led to believe that he remains unrepentant, despite George’s tribulations, and life in Bedford Falls goes on much like before. Except with a renewed outlook for George Bailey.

And for some odd reason, I like that. I guess because it smacks of reality. The lesson here isn’t to do good because some day “the bad guys will get theirs.” It’s merely to do good for the sake of being good. And this brings me back to the “Pantsuit Nation.” There are numerous posts by people who have encountered hatred and prejudice merely for being themselves—black, gay, Muslim, women—and they’ve turned around and responded with love and forgiveness: The father and son who shoveled their racist neighbor’s driveway. The woman who bought coffee for the homophobe behind her at Starbuck’s. And dozens more examples of people responding to hatred with love. And in a country where the haters seem more emboldened than ever, this is what keeps me going. This is what gives me hope.

My other holiday favorite, “Scrooge,” appeals to me for a completely different reason. Everyone knows the story: Over the course of his visits from three ghosts, a crotchety old miser comes to the realization that he’s been living his life all wrong. Redemption is a powerful thing and none of us are beyond the need for it. But to me the best part of the movie isn’t the fact that Scrooge has a change of heart—it’s how readily his acquaintances accept and celebrate his new-found enlightenment. They don’t say, “Screw you, Ebenezer—I’m not going to forgive the time you charged me 20% on that loan!” Instead, they all embrace the new-and-improved, forgiving, kinder Scrooge and rejoice in his better-late-than-never humanity.

If our country could internalize these two lessons, it would be a game changer:

Combat hatred with kindness—everywhere you see it. There is nothing that will disarm a hater more quickly than being responded to with love.
Readily accept any person’s attempts to be “better,” whether they are seeking to understand another’s viewpoints or making a small gesture of reconciliation—accept it graciously.

I’m not suggesting that we ignore or discount acts of hatred, prejudice or violence… It’s very important that we acknowledge these for what they are, but don’t let them be the last word. Let the last word be love.

God bless us, everyone!*

* Note: There is no disclaimer here. “Everyone” means everyone.

Easier Said Than Done

Tag: Politics