And so, and so , and so

And also I could say , so forth, but no.

So the level of adversarial discourse, has essentially
drowned out just about any other dialog.

IMHO,, not a good situation in practical terms,
because you must either conscientiously ignore it,
or alternatively , become mostly consumed by
it.

Seems to me there should be an alternative path.
You might think of it not inappropriately as a
path towards sanity, which would include most probably
a pretty strenuous effort to achieve an atmosphere of
co-operation. 

And I think one way this might occur is if we make an
attempt to change our selection of president, first
by being more inclusive , and secondly, attempting
as much as possible to make it non-partisan.  The objective
would be to have a president who is essentially
all about encouraging bi-partisan and co-operative
discourse.

Certainly, a strenuous effort, but I do not believe
it is impossible.

This is something that would have to seriously
involve the media, because of course the media
does, in fact ,profit from the promotion of adversarial
discourse. 

But largely and primarily it needs to be done I feel
on a local or regional level before there is sufficient
support for it.  The requirement of these different
organizations, must , I feel, occur regionally
and locally.  This will give this process sufficient
foundation, to demand support on the  level
of the nation.

There may be those that argue organization and
co-operation is not required in our public life.

Really?  I hope this is not a position supported by
the eminent scientists of economy.

Well, perhaps if nothing is done the historians
will inherent the world, but then who will they
tell their stories to?