Letters to the Editor: Why 'their fanaticism is why we're polarized' misses the point

To the editor: Jean Guerrero's op-ed column on the polarization that is currently poisoning our political system, and its advice from the teachings of Marshall Rosenberg's "Nonviolent Communication," was inspirational. Specifically, Guerrero suggested, "For a relationship to survive, it’s best to communicate 'what we are observing, feeling, and needing.’"

How disappointing to read letters in response that only rationalize why their point of view is different or more important and apparently miss the whole point of her writing. There is room for us to work together.

When these writers say that bridging our differences will be too difficult, complex or impossible, it makes me feel hopeless. I need for them to be more engaged and optimistic about the importance of our great American democratic experiment.

Donald R. Duckworth, Arcadia

..

To the editor: None of the letters in response to Guerrero's column mentioned the elephant in our national media zoo — unchecked propaganda.

The rise of one-sided right-wing propaganda is one outcome of the overturning in 1987 of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission’s Fairness Doctrine.

Without a requirement for licensed radio and television broadcasters to present fair and balanced coverage and opposing points of view, we are doomed to a national conversation where far too many never read, watch or hear truth.

Robert Ferguson, Atascadero, Calif.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.