You're Not as Crazy as I Thought (But You're Still Wrong): Conversations between a Die-Hard Liberal and a Devoted Conservative

by Philip T. Neisser, Jacob Hess

Americans have been divided along political lines for so long that they have nearly forgotten how to talk to one another, much less how to listen. This is not likely to improve as long as differences between them continue to be cast in overly simplistic terms, such as “ignorance” vs. “enlightened awareness” or “morality” vs. “reprobate immorality.” Such dichotomies ignore the fact that many citizens who disagree politically nonetheless share a desire to work for the larger good of society.

Phil Neisser, a self-described “left-wing atheist,” first met Jacob Hess, a social conservative, at the 2008 proceedings of the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation. After discovering a shared commitment to cross-party dialogue, they embarked together on a yearlong attempt to practice what they preached. In this book they share the result by exploring the boundaries of core disagreements about morality, power, gender roles, sexuality, race, big government, big business, and big media.

Each chapter revolves around an issue explored in depth through back-and-forth, lively question and response. This nuanced, iterative process was transformative for both authors, and could likewise serve as a valuable resource for anyone―liberal or conservative―who feels disillusioned by today’s often shallow, demagogic public discourse.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Self Help

230 pages, Hardcover

First published April 30, 2012

Reviews

[S · Rating 1 out of 5]

Oh god.

I couldn't keep reading it.

They just go on and on patting each other on the back while refusing to acknowledge that one person is working from reality and the other is working from faith.

Faith is not how you are allowed to dictate legislation in this country. If your religion is the ONLY REASON you're against something, you don't get to pass a law about it. The end.

THE END.

Does the liberal guy ever point that out? Not that I read. They just go round and round generalizing things so far that they have no choice to agree on SOMETHING, except that SOMETHING isn't actionable.

"Abortion no?"
"No. Abortion yes."
"Babies cute?"
"No. Babies wrinkled."
"Sky blue?"
"Yes. Sky Blue."
CONSENSUS ACHIEVED
BACK PAT UNLOCK

Ye gods. Shut up shut up the both of you.

[Eudora · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the interest of full disclosure, I helped edit this book and I created the index. That said, if you are trying to understand 'the other side' on key political issues - the role of the media, gay marriage, gender, morality - this is a great place to start. By turns serious, fun, irritating, affirming, the conversation between this liberal and conservative lends weight and balance to today's frothy, heated political scene.

[Reza Amiri Praramadhan · Rating 4 out of 5]

During the first half of the book, I was under difficulty identifying who's the liberal and who's the conservative. Only when they started talking about issues on the second part of the book, the differences became clearer. This book is like an oasis of peace in the middle of mud-slinging between liberals and conservatives portrayed in mainstream media

[Richard]

Mentioned in the Economist's A Country Divided in the context of the escalating partisanship in the United States before the 2012 presidential election. Possibly a good companion for Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion .

(Unfortunately only available from my library as an e-book. Grumble.)