On Political Civility
Could you imagine a US Presidential campaign where one side said of another that by winning their opponent “were radicals who would murder their opponents, burn churches, and destroy the country”? How about a loser in a Presidential election that calls his opponent, “Judas of the West”? Maybe a political operative that would forge a letter to a foreign government and said government’s response would destroy a President? Or, most famously, a handful of men try to spy on their opponents and get caught destroying the man they supported?
Sadly, a lack of civility in American political discourse has been the norm in our history and not just a recent addition in our troubled times. Though sometimes it just doesn’t seem that way. In Reconcilable Differences, Ronald Brownstein writes:
From the final years of Bill Clinton’s presidency through Bush’s two bruising terms, American politics has been polarized as sharply as at any point in the past century. Party-line voting in Congress hasn’t been so prevalent since the days of William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt. In the history of modern polling, Republican and Democratic voters have never held such disparate views of a president’s job performance as they do of Bush’s.
But as the 2008 Presidential Campaign comes to a close, we are once again examining how we got to this place and, more importantly, how we get out of it. Over the past few days, I hope one has seen on Delaware Liberal (we’re having internal debates as well) an examination of our political discourse.
But what is civilitiy? And what is meant by political civility?
Where to start? The following clip is from The Rachel Maddow Show this past Monday. In the clip, Rachel interviews David Frum, former speech writer for George W. Bush and columnist for the National Review Online. To put it lightly, these two did not get along, however I think their exchange regarding political civility was a necessary one.
Frum says:
I’m suggesting – the line is often attributed to Mahatma Gandhi. I don’t know if it’s really his – that we should be the change we want to see or that we say we want to see. And so if we want to have a more intelligent, more grown-up politics, and I think we all say that, then we ought to do it.
I think Frum and Maddow showed us what the issue is, but as I asked earlier, what is civil political discourse? Nicole Billante and Peter Saunders write:
For those directly engaged in politics, this means listening to others, being tolerant of views other than one’s own, and recognising that the principle of ‘shared governance’ has a superior claim to one’s allegiance over any sectional or ideological claim. American sociologist Edward Shils, with his strong focus on political civility, argues that ‘civility is an attitude and a mode of action which attempts to strike a balance between conflicting demands and conflicting interests’. This does not mean that one must meekly give in to opponents—liberal civility is fully consistent with robust criticism and passionate advocacy—but it does mean that expression of hatred, contempt or distrust of political adversaries is ruled out as illiberal and uncivil.
Others have talked about this issue more intelligently than I ever could. I originally saw the following video over at Merit-Bound Alley. This is a presentation by psychologist Jonathan Haidt about civil discourse and how to understand where the opposition side is coming from.
Yale Law Professor Stephen Carter and author of Civility talks of Political Civility and how we can help our children as well as ourselves have a more civil political discourse: a curriculum course on rhetoric; give opposition politicians the time to listen to their arguments and slow down one’s life.
But nemski, you ask, what does this all mean? In Billante and Saunders paper they define civility as Respect, Relations with Strangers, and Self-Regulation. A fourth item I would add is that as human beings, we should be concerned about how we behave, not how others are behaving. As mothers are wont to say, “Worry about yourself, don’t worry what others are doing.”
Civil Politics has a simple pledge about civility in politics and how one will behave. It would be nice to see other Delawareans that take this pledge. As I proceed in writing for DL and commenting on other blogs, I will try to comport myself in a civil and respectful manner. I hope you choose to do so as well.
Words have the power to both destroy and heal. When words are both true and kind, they can change our world. – Buddhist Saying
Tags: Blogosphere, Delaware
Nice post, but feh this navel gazing.
A fourth item I would add is that as human beings, we should be concerned about how we behave, not how others are behaving.
How much evidence do we need before we realize that any and all calls to “civility” amount to Democrats laying down while Republicans kick them.
We’d have to be the biggest morons in the world to expect Republicans to be anything other than what they are; hardcore lowlifes who reflexively party’s interest above the countries.
I’ve been pushed into this combative stance by 8 years of Republican treachery and deviousness. I don’t like it but I’m reconciled to it.
No unilateral niceness. No quarter to anti-American wing nut a-holes out to wreck this country.
” As I proceed in writing for DL and commenting on other blogs, I will try to comport myself in a civil and respectful manner. I hope you choose to do so as well.”
Glad to hear it Nemski, though I think you’re generally civil already. (at least from what I’ve seen of your political discourse on this site.)
I think your quote from the Billante & Sanders article sums it up beautifully.
Now the asshat DV who continually deletes my comments, well there’s no way I could call him civil or respectful.
Torturers? Oh, let’s be sooo nice to them. They must have good motivations! 🙂
Domestic spies listening to our phone calls? Well, they’re just “listening to others.” That’s good, right? 🙂
Stealing our tax dollars to give to Wall Street? Ok, you can, just this once. 🙂
Lying us into war? 10,000’s dead? Let bygones be bygones. Their intent was good, wasn’t it? 🙂
Double the national debt? You’re going to pay it back, right? 🙂
Stealing the presidential election? OK,it was close, anyway. 🙂
Look, Nancy took impeachment off the table. Can’t we all just get along? 🙂 🙂
“I hope one has seen on Delaware Liberal (we’re having internal debates as well) an examination of our political discourse”
Did you start by gathering in a “circle”???? 😉
“How much evidence do we need before we realize that any and all calls to “civility” amount to [Americans] laying down while [Jihadis] kick them.
We’d have to be the biggest morons in the world to expect [Iraqis/terrorists/brown people] to be anything other than what they are; [blood thirsty killers] who [mean to kill us all]
I’ve been pushed into this combative stance by 8 years of [terrorism] and deviousness. I don’t like it but I’m reconciled to it.
No unilateral niceness. No quarter to [Jihadist] wing nut a-holes out to wreck this country.”
Great Post! I think that we should all consider stepping up to the plate and be more “human”. Left and Right wing combined. I’ve been on blogs where everything pretty much amounts to name calling and such. There isn’t a need for it and usually because Politics is such a hot button topic that people resort to that. I’m for civility and it doesn’t mean that we ignore the topics but rather stay above those that decide to gutter ball the entire discussion. Awesome post Nemski!
Now the asshat DV who continually deletes my comments, well there’s no way I could call him civil or respectful.
Mike W, please worry about yourself. Don’t worry about DV. That’s Mrs. Hotviti’s job. 😉
Good luck, nemski. Just look at the first comment here. Your point is moot and futile as long as “people” like Jason are around.
Nemski – Why’d you pull that comment out of moderation and not the next?
Hube – Yup, Jason’s 1st comment is a perfect example of one that’s not civil.
Hmmm… maybe Nemski pulled it to make a point.
Nice post, Nemski.
What a bunch of crap. Esp. Duffy & Hube.
Anonone pwned you all.
I can only worry about how I carry myself. However, as a poster here, I also get to watch comments and try to keep everyone on topic.
It’s your choice to come, read and comment. Look I can’t, won’t and will not try to control Jason or DV. If someone hurts your feelings, ignore them. Move on and participate in the debate. Because the one thing I do know, each one of us that comes to DL wants a better Delaware.
And frankly, I applaud Nemski for this post, but given who the DL contributors are and what I’ve seen from them in the past I think it’s a good bet we won’t be seeing any political civility on this site.
“Because the one thing I do know, each one of us that comes to DL wants a better Delaware.”
Absolutely. In fact I think we ALL want a better country as well, we just disagree on what road to make that a reality, and on what that reality should look like.
“I also get to watch comments and try to keep everyone on topic.”
OK, so then why do comments that ARE on topic still not get through huh Nemski?
OK, so then why do comments that ARE on topic still not get through huh Nemski?
Because, Mike W, each one of your comments needs to be approved before it is posted. I don’t like it any more than you do, especially since I need to read each one.
So, you can stay, read, comment and wait. That’s just the way it is.
“Because, Mike W, each one of your comments needs to be approved before it is posted. I don’t like it any more than you do, especially since I need to read each one.”
Well that’s certainly a shining example of the civil political discourse displayed on this site.
Well that’s certainly a shining example of the civil political discourse displayed on this site.
Michael — can I call you Michael? — I imagine you’re being sarcastic. Sarcasm as you know is difficult to get on the internet.
You know there’s a history between you and DL. We might be liberals with all of that bending over backwards and all accommodating things we do, but you abused the right to comment here. But, alas, we are liberals and we are trying to work with you.
Patience my young Padawan, patience.
Yes Nemski – Delaware Liberal is a shining beacon of tolerance, civility, where folks respond rationally, with logic and tact to political dissent. One only needs to read this site for a bit to see that.
“we are liberals and we are trying to work with you.”
You’ve done a bang-up job of that. Right on par with the wonderful job the Dems have done so far with their majority in Congress. Hell, right on par with how well Obama has “reached across the aisle” and been a “unifier” as he so often claims. (falsely I might add)
Yes, you can call me Michael, and yes, that was sarcasm. I suppose I should have used a smiley face? (: Hell, for the record, if I ever make a comment that seems sarcastic it probably is. I tend to do that a lot.
Man oh Man.
Mike W is a thread killer isnt he?
Honestly, the threads were so much nicer (and DL in general) when ALL Mike W’s posts were removed. We know his agenda. He is not here for any other reason than to insult, whine, and push his racist anti-Obama agenda.
But I guess we need to be nice to Mikey since we liberals can’t take our own side in an argument without appearing “uncivil” and we must be tolerant of even the racists and wingnuts who hate us.
“Hell, right on par with how well Obama has “reached across the aisle” and been a “unifier” as he so often claims. (falsely I might add)”
You approve that?
Sheesh – where’s Donsquishy?
“and we must be tolerant of even the racists and wingnuts who hate us.”
Hate is a pretty strong word Anonone. Not exactly conducive to political civility now is it? I may hate many liberal policies, but I certainly don’t hate all liberals, nor am I racist simply because I’m anti-Obama (your whackjob nutty cries of racism notwithstanding.) BTW you can disagree with someone policies without hating them, though I don’t expect those afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome to understand that.
And yeah, I consistently insult and levy personal attacks at everyone here…… sure…..get a grip man. That baseless accusation is getting pretty old, to the point where it’s laughably hypocritical to see it continually presented in lieu of something based in reality.
Off topic:
Who ever said Donsquishy was a bad porn name was so freaking right.
If you are acting like an asshole and your position is baseless rubbish and I call you a rubbish peddling asshole, is that uncivil?
Thought provoking post, Nemski.
“…since we liberals can’t take our own side in an argument without appearing “uncivil” and we must be tolerant of even the racists and wingnuts who hate us.”
The *appearance* of civility isn’t essential, or expected. However, it would be refreshing (and civilized) if you would simply be man enough to take some criticisms without resorting to name calling, stereotyping, or going ad hominem.
Screw that you moronic racist! 🙂
Very well said Dorian and geek.
“nor am I racist simply because I’m anti-Obama”
No kiddin’, Mike W.
I am sure that your racism is more complex than that and has been around long before Obama appeared on the scene.
We don’t care why you’re a racist. Please leave. You’re not wanted here.
“We don’t care why you’re a racist. Please leave. You’re not wanted here.”
Once again, based on DL rules as explained to me by Pandora and Del Dem when is this idiot going to be muzzled and/or given a timeout? If this type of statement was against the rules for me it’s against the rules for a screwy race-baiter like anonone.
Excellent post, Nemski. I’m afraid it’s fallen on deaf ears (eyes?) around here, tho.
I agree with mike w., btw. If you guys really want any kind of credibility in terms of your ‘rules’ on posting comments (read: censorship), you should suspend anonone for the above comment. Just sayin.
You two should be dating.