There is, in our nation, an increasing divisiveness that worries me. I recognize it perhaps most often in politics, because that's where most of my attention is focused, but it rears it's ugly head in other ways too.

I received an email from an anti-smoker, in response to my article yesterday, who sincerely believes that because something is offensive to him, it simply should not be allowed, wherever he happens to go. He really believes that if he can smell smoke, someone should eliminate it, and the source. One of his charges was that "Most smokers are addicted bastards who do not care about other people's rights." I honestly cannot even imagine that mentality, and it worries me. I worry that someone can have such an attitude toward others. He was talking about cigarette smoke, but he surely must find other things offensive too, and presumably believes they should all be forcibly eliminated as well.

Another reader named greg (no, not Greg) responded with a smart-aleck patronizing attitude that became more interesting. I discovered that he writes a blog and that his email to me was a mild version of what he wrote online, which started with "somehow, a jackass named bob smith (i'm thinking witness protection program) blogs over at the city pages.", and a heading of "morons in the mist / morons in our midst". As I read the rest, I was reminded of the little tricks Rush Limbaugh uses to make fun of people who can't respond and make points with his audience.

Even though I found these emails to be somewhat offensive, I'm not suggesting that they should be eliminated or even censored in any way. I can't say I enjoy them, but they're informative. I usually answer such emails in a more respectful manner, and quite often the originally vitriolic writer settles down into a more rational conversation. We probably won't end up in agreement, but usually closer than we began.

Such emails are depressing, though. I'm afraid that they not only indicate just how brainwashed young people have become by the lies told about smoke, but, more importantly, I think they're symptomatic of an aggressiveness that is becoming much more common. It's hard to pin down, but I'll try.

Let's start with TV, where we now have a flurry of shows featuring some sort of crude, in-your-face behavior. Far too often, heroes and villains act very much the same. I love basketball, but the same attitude has inflicted the NBA. Scoring points isn't enough for many players... it has to be accompanied by an "up yours" attitude. Much of law enforcement has changed from "friend of the people" to a sort of chippy, "give-me-an-excuse-to-use-excessive-force" presence. Our military has adopted a general tactic of aggressive, overwhelming force.

I don't want to overstate this case. Out of about 500-600 readers, 2 wrote to me with an angry "voice". Virtually all the people I have personal contact with seem much the same as they always have, except that many are, in fact, deliberately "nicer" than they used to be, which I think is a clue. Many people have become what we call "politically correct", almost afraid of offending others. Obligatory niceties have increased to the point where it is difficult to tell an honest compliment from a false one... meaning that you must either believe them all or ignore them all. Either choice yields a distorted view.

What seems to happen, as a result of this "expected" niceness, is a kind of schizophrenia... super-nice people who can turn super-nasty under some circumstances. Sometimes the nastiness is public; sometimes it's from concealment. Many smokers can tell you of an incident where they were suddenly verbally attacked by someone who would never otherwise raise their voice. Whatever the triggers are that cause one to become the other, it is definitely more common than it used to be.

The reaction of the very sensitive anti-smoker does match other triggers I've noticed. Some people can go hyper over some environmental cause, or an animal-rights issue, or abortion, and their reaction can be so over-the-top that it shocks those around them. There are murders for each of those issues (oh yes, smokers have been murdered).

What these issues have in common is a set of organizations which, in order to gather members and increase their own funding, use FEAR as a motivator, and deliberately churn that fear into anger and hatred. These organizations use deception very deliberately, and they do not accept any responsibility for the extreme acts their deception and hate mongering might cause. They are very skillful in their deceptions, with scientific-sounding claims that are not easy to dispute. They know that very few readers have the time to question their claims, and that even if they're exposed, the expose will get little attention. They get a lot of media coverage because their lies make for good, scary headlines.

But... my point is not about those organizations, but about the effect they have on some members of the public. They convince some well-meaning people that groups of other people are seriously evil. If their claims are taken to heart, they've defined a group of people who deserve hatred, and aroused some individuals to that schizophrenic level I described.

You can find non-smokers who would never think of ragging on their smoking friends, but who will verbally attack smokers they DON'T know. You can find other people who can get just as furious about abortion, but who won't even care where their friends stand on the issue... they wouldn't even ask. There are those who can scream about animal rights while wearing leather and eating steak. Schizophrenic... worked into an abstract lather by totally unscrupulous manipulators who aren't bothered by the divisiveness they're causing.

Most of my lifetime, people didn't fight much over their differences, and they were even less likely to try to force others to change, or punish those who disagreed. One major exception occurs to me... unions would occasionally work their members into a hateful frenzy that caused bloodshed. In my lifetime, the first great polarization was the Vietnam War, that also resulted in bloodshed among those who disagreed... and again, it was the result of an organization, our government, who pushed the people so far with lies that many of us chose up sides and hated each other. It's happened again with the War on Iraq, for the same reasons.

We each need to remind ourselves that we are all very much more alike than we are different. Regardless of our varying opinions, we are NOT organized into hateful camps that are out to destroy each other. People who voted for Bush are not so very different from those who voted for Kerry. Those who support the war have much in common with those who don't. If you think through those people you call friends, you will see that you have many differences that you easily tolerate. As friends, we have the chance to find those points on which we agree, and realize that our differences are usually minor by comparison. When we allow ourselves to be sucked in by mongers of fear and hate, we back each other into opposite corners and lose complete sight of the fact that we agree far more than we disagree.

If you feel some need to hate someone, hate those organizations that are manipulating the public into divisiveness. They deserve it... your neighbors don't.