In talking to literally hundreds of people about the Lowes issue, I have come across a small number who are really angry about it. Typically these folks are in the pro-Lowes camp, although the anti-Lowe’s contingent is not immune from this all-too-human feeling.
Anger management experts tell us that anger usually can be traced to two root causes: 1. Frustration about not getting what we want, especially when we were expecting to get it. 2. Feeling that somebody does not respect us or care how we feel.
On the pro-Lowe’s side, some are frustrated that we don’t have a Lowe’s already. They are especially upset because they were expecting to have one open by now, and reasonably believe that we would have, except for those darn PDDGers who have messed everything up.
This is where part two comes in. Some of our pro-Lowe’s friends are angry at the opposition because they feel that “those people” don’t really understand or respect them. Frequent statements I hear are that the PDDG members are all college people and don’t understand what it is like to be in business. This is then extended to the contention that they therefore don’t care about the concerns of ordinary people.
On the other side of the spectrum, PDDGers are frustrated in their expectation that government will operate in a fair and open manner. They then assume that the reason that our government is taking certain actions or appears to be hiding things is that they have a hidden agenda and are in league with the developer.
From here it is just a short step to conclude that if they care about the developer’s interests then they probably don’t care what the ordinary person thinks. As you can see, both sides have come to the same conclusion starting from totally different positions: the people on the other side of the argument don’t respect us and don’t care what we think.
It is always a temptation to try to harness this kind of anger for political purposes: “Vote for me, I am the one who shares your frustration and feels your pain.” Even more effective is the negative campaign: “Don’t vote for them, they don’t respect you or care what you think!”
Of course all this can cycle repeatedly without making any progress towards a resolution. If you read the current crop of letters to the editor, you will see much anger, although the more effective are those who have learned to cloak their feelings in passive-aggressive language.
These folks will complain bitterly about the overly aggressive tactics of the other side and maintain that their side is only trying to be reasonable. They will then proceed to personally attack and savage the other side. Some will, no doubt, see this column as an example of that technique.
Posted by corrinstrong 
