“in Praise of the ‘Wobblies’” by Ted Gup

When involved with debates of any subject, there are always those people who never really seem to know where they stand. Throughout most of Gup’s life, he found himself flexible on a variety of opposing arguments. He states that he would linger in the ‘no man’s land between opposing arguments’, and wished to be drawn to one side, but found advantages and disadvantages in both. When he grew to accept his ‘confusion’, he realized that people like him are needed for the world to function. He, along with others like him, act as a bridge between opposing arguments, and without them, different groups would be completely divided. He believes that every argument needs a few ‘wobblies’ – those who don’t know where they stand – to hold the common ground. In our lives, there are always people around us who seem to know exactly where they stand, and don’t hesitate in making everybody in the general vicinity aware of it as well. It always seems that no matter how the conversation begins, it always gets drawn to the familiar subjects, whether intended or not. People who are very certain of where they stand can be drawn into conflict by the smallest of issues. This is especially true during election years. Being a liberal in a broadly conservative school, I agree with Gup, saying that we need the in-between people to keep a balance between arguments. When the level of certainty is high, it’s always good to have a few wobblies around. Wobblies show that strong opinions often get the better of us, and we shouldn’t focus so much on what divides us. I agree with the author’s opinion to a large extent. I, like the author, do not have a strong stance when it comes to certain topics such as political issues. And that is okay with me. The writing in this piece is very well done which makes sense because the author teaches journalism at a college. The author uses several good writing techniques like a well formed and obvious thesis in the first paragraph and excellent word choice. Words