Guiding Principles

Guiding principles for Honest Outrage

Honesty is paramount
Not only is lying not an option, but neither is intentionally omitting information that would disprove my point. Of course, I reserve the right to joke and use sarcasm, in which case I may make statements that aren’t technically true. If done well, such techniques would be obvious and not misleading. My goal is to always learn, and this blog is a part of my learning process. I share some of what I learn, and also some of my opinions. If I obtain information and insight that disprove a previously held position of mine, the obvious remedy is to change my position, not ignore, hide or distort the damning evidence. Lying, distortion, intellectual dishonesty and ideological spin are the enemies of progress in a democratic, or any other kind of, society.

Nothing is sacred
I’m not here to trash tradition or common wisdom for its own sake, but I am also not afraid to speak my mind no matter where it leads. I don’t challenge beliefs and attitudes for fun, but because I honestly find them to be flawed and worthy of challenge. Some people have accused me of being argumentative for kicks, playing devil’s advocate without believing in my argument. The truth is that I hold many opinions that clash with those of most people I know, so being argumentative is a natural result of voicing my true ideas. No topic is off limits, and I may occasionally veer off into unexpected terrain, but this blog will mostly cover topics of most interest to me. These usually involve issues of war and peace, as well as those related to the exploitation and suffering of the powerless at the hands of the powerful. I hope to inspire people to remember, and defend, those who are too often neglected by mainstream discourse, both American and international.

Second guessing is welcomed
I often ask myself, when I react to new information, if I am allowing any biases to affect my judgment. For instance, sometimes I ask myself in regards to an action or position taken by a politician with whom I normally disagree, “Would my opinion be different if the same action or position was taken by someone I like?” I encourage Democrats to ask themselves, “would I agree with Barack Obama’s decision if it was made by George Bush?” or “would I disagree with Karl Rove’s statement if it was made by Obama?” Remaining open to the idea that those with whom I often disagree can still sometimes be right, and those with whom I often agree can sometimes be egregiously wrong, isn’t always easy. If I ever fail to do so in writing this blog, I should be called on it. I may not like it (who enjoys being proven wrong?) but it’s necessary for growth to accept such valid criticism.

Being optimistic isn’t the same as ignoring the negative
Some people mistake my seemingly constant displeasure with the world around me as pessimism. What strikes me is how pessimistic many of these people are. They don’t express opinions related to war, poverty or politics, but in many cases that’s because they think things are the way they are and can never be substantially improved. “That’s just the way it is and I can’t change it.” If I felt that way, I would not have started this blog. I will not likely affect major changes on my own, but I can connect with others who can help in the battle. Nobody will have reason to take up the fight without recognizing, and at times being furious at, the realities around them. Being mad isn’t the same as being negative. Give me anger over apathy any day.

These principles are not complete
I hope to know more about the world, and myself, tomorrow than I do today. And I hope I know more today, even if just by a little bit, than I did yesterday. As I learn more, what is and is not important to me, and how I approach what is most important to me, should evolve. Some of my ideas and ideals are pretty much set in stone absent an earth-shattering change or revelation. But there should always be an openness to refinement, and an open mind in regard to one’s worldview.