Author's Question - "Are we beginning to see unusual numbers of people holding trenchant positions at the poles of public opinion, especially on keystone issues? What does this hold for our collective future?"

Answer - That certainly describes the trenchant, polarised OLO commentariat.

Author Comments "However, too much polarisation results in a shrinking middle ground and the growth of alienation, bitterness and recrimination."

Answer - That certainly describes the polarised OLO commentariat where commenters in the middle are few. Loony Right and Loony Left predominate.

Author Observes "According to one recent survey, two percent of Brits admit to having insulted someone they don't know online within the past year."

Answer - The Brits should get around more. At OLO around eighty percent would have insulted commenter strangers.

Naturally I'm not one of them :)

Spot on plantagenet - I rarely come to OLO these days because of the stridency of the comments and sadly, too often, of the articles.

The truth is that most people don't like to engage with opinions they don't already agree with, and yet how can you grow and learn unless you are prepared to do so?

I would love to issue a challenge to all of OLO's commentors to try to find at least one aspect of the other side's argument that they can agree with and to engage with that.

And it's worth pointing out that this polarisation is not limited to the Western world. I was chatting to an Egyptian army staffer in Spain last year and he was bemoaning how the public discourse today limits to you being either a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, or anti them. There is no middle ground allowed.

Can you give of an example of what we could engage in. Lets take the example of Tony Abbott's leadership.

Or let us find middle ground on the teachings and effects of the Qur'an.

Thanks Cazza

Concerning the stridency of the comments "of the articles." As an article writer I think there is some need for stridency because a totally balanced set of arguments won't be read or commented on as much. Articles need to be punchy - particulary for such esoteric subjects as submarines - http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=4452 .

But I also agree. Too many commenters indulge in personal mud-slinging - becoming oblivious to what the article was all about.
--

Hi 579

Yes "Tony Abbott's leadership" is a worthy subject with many sides.

My position is that he's too much of a Uniform Chaser searching for photo oppurtunities with broad-shoulded, uniformed Policemen, military and firies. Photo opportunities are a cheap way to boost one's standing in the polls.

A counter-point is that a national leader should show leadership in times or places of crisis.

A counter-counter point is that a confident and discerning leader should delegate many of his Crisis Photo Opportunities (Uniform Chasing) to his Ministers eg. Defence Minister and Attorney-General (once an adequate one is found). The discerning leader should be confident and stable enough to pull strings, delegate and make things right behind the scenes.

What do you think?

Regards

Pete

I think Abbott is playing the part of a lone leader, not part of the bigger picture. It would be incredibly hard to find middle ground to talk about. His budget stunned a nation, his lies, back-flips, and retracted policy, before any announcement or explanation, I don,t see any middle ground there either.

It does make opinion hard to come up with, without it sounding one eyed. The worshipers of Tony say give the man a chance, supposedly allow bad policy to prevail, I think that is what they are saying. Their coaxing is always vague and not to the point. More like verbal diarrhea.

It does make middle ground hard to find, if any exist. I always try and find something good to say about anybody, but our honorable PM makes it very hard to achieve