Hard pass

The hard pass concept is a way not to resolve conflicts or find middle ground in any way, but to deflect confrontational debate which, these days, seems inevitably to increase antagonism while serrating the edges of whatever gulf existed before the interaction. It's not a great option but often it seems to be the only option to preserve some semblance of the existing relationship once a controversial topic is on the table. It's a good option, especially since practically everything is controversial in the contemporary climate. I find myself exercising it increasingly often.

The downside is that it inherently restricts or constrains the scope of some set - potentially an ever-increasing set - of our interactions (not that open conflict and judgmental dismay does not do so to even greater degrees). It seems to me that the only recourse is to encourage la révolution to devour ses enfants increasingly quickly. I have no idea which way Tuesday's results will go, but am hoping for a hard landing that pushes everyone through denial-grief-and the rest of the faux Kubler-Ross blah blah toward clearer vision of reality and constructive engagement toward compromise within such commonly-agreed boundaries as the Constitution, laws, laissez-faire, and a mutual rather than unilaterally-imposed social contract. Let us pray.