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