Political control in Canada ultimately rests with voters; if you rule out talking to other people, you rule out the possibility of influencing political control and necessarily cede the battlefield to others. Obviously it's easy to win an uncontested battle. Obviously not all fora are appropriate for potentially contentious discussions. Since another person's vote is effectively a means of asserting a degree of influence and control over me, I resent the votes of incompetents, fools, and lazy teat-sucking grifters.
As noted above, political discussion ought start with understanding the system and correcting myths/misunderstanding. That discussion can be entirely non-partisan. Next up should be a practical understanding of economics, which will start to touch on some people's partisan "priors".
Ultimately, nothing is possible without some kind of fiscal and economic framework, and fewer things are possible with weaker frameworks. The "things" (spending preferences) are the topics to which arguments should be confined. There should be no argument over how to seek optimum frameworks, but since so many people are so fucking lazy and greedy, trying to argue against spending the future's taxes today is a never-ending battle.
Finally, since (noted elsewhere) peoples' social change velocities are different, necessarily over time the major clusters of political affiliation are going to become increasingly separated. That will make it increasingly difficult to talk with anyone assured that they occupy whatever they imagine to be "the right side of history".
hamiltonnaval.ca
