Campaign for Civil Discourse

I think it is time for a campaign for civil discourse.

The Public Good has been eclipsed in our media by an antagonistic and partisan political culture. This is creating and deepening a sense of disconnection and alienation between social classes, sub-cultures and ethnic groups. Such divisions appear to have deepened, even as we have had more time and more chances to get to know one another, and should have come closer together in recent decades, rather than find ourselves pitted against one another.

It is time we return our focus to our common humanity, despite our differences of lifestyle and opinion, and bring back the values necessary to ensure a productive civil discourse - one which resolves our differences to produce the best outcomes for society as a whole.

Part of the problem is that, in recent decades, several changes have occurred in the public arena. Important values have become uncoupled from one another, compromising the integrity of the value-system. These values are:

a) Humility and Strength

b) Honesty and Integrity
c) Respect and Compassion

We must bring back the awareness that the highest form of strength is one carried with humility, and that to live up to our highest integrity is to communicate with honesty, even when we think that strategically we may “win” with deceit. Our Presidents and Prime Ministers must have the Strength to admit that they do not know everything, that they ought to seek counsel and guidance from others with more knowledge and expertise than they have in specific fields relevant to public life. Instead, we have political leaders who display their "leadership" by defying the advice of our most learned citizens, and pushing ahead with ill-conceived plans that are doomed to failure.
We must remind each other that compassion is fundamentally related to respect - and that it means we must consider the experiences, perspectives, and - even though this may be hard to do - empathize with the emotional states of our opponents.
While it may be tempting to condemn someone for wrongdoing, or to counter-attack when attacked, the process of coming to understanding and agreement is sabotaged by these tactics. We all suffer when there is no forum for working out our differences.
We will further the progress of our values if we stand strong, but not hostile. Rather than fight, we may hold our ground and illuminate the problems (inaccuracies, distortions, and damage) with what our opposition has done or is doing, but we must do so simply, clearly and free from blame. We must acknowledge our own mistakes when we make them, and take responsibility for correcting them. We must express our disappointments in the mistakes of others (rather than attack people for them) and request that others to live up to their responsibilities to repair any damage they have done. Rather than vilify them, we must search for and empathize with the thoughts and feelings (fear, judgment, mistrust, frustration, self-protection, protection of “in-group”) that may motivate someone to do negative or hurtful things. We may acknowledge pressures they are under, or good intentions they may be trying to fulfill - and then we can move on to illuminate the downfalls of their approach.

Regarding social programs:
Instead of groups demanding things from politicians and wealthy citizens, from a position of entitlement, we should encourage such groups to make strong requests that the principles of fairness and integrity be fulfilled- so that the duty of society to its citizens is fulfilled. Currently, alienated demands from positions of weakness are inspiring contempt and enmity from politicians and lobby groups representing the business class. This is a recipe for disaster, and we must turn it around, until those with the power to help see the value of extending helping hands to their less privileged fellow citizens.

Instead of name calling right-wing promoters of hatred (which further entrenches the in-group/out-group value system underlying their value system), we must work to illustrate our common humanity, and to point out the behaviours that are problematic: identifying mean-spirited, divisive discourse, and calling instead for a discourse that includes the needs of every member of society. We must not only ask for but model and prime the values we intend to promote.

For an illustration of the psychological roots of conservative and progressive value-systems, see Johnathan Haidt at TED, and you will see the obligation is on the “progressives” to reach out to the conservatives, and not the other way around. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs41JrnGaxc

Also see Brene Brown speak, at TEDx Houston, about the roots of intolerant, mean-spirited civil discourse - and what must be done to overcome it.

Regarding civil engagement:
Instead of treating issues as a spectator or commentator, which is how our media has socialized us all to behave, we should speak of our roles and responsibilities as citizens. Rather than express the desire for others to fix things or get it right, we should illustrate the roles people can play (including ourselves) in solving our common problems. Essentially, we must change the dialogue from "politics is a spectator sport" to "political participation is our civic duty". Possible ways to participate include: letter writing (politicians, newspapers, radio stations, television stations), going to meetings and helping raise awareness and the level of understanding within different communities, lobbying politicians and civil servants, fund-raising for organizations that serve the public good, organizing for political candidates, etc...

Strategically, these values and principles may be promoted in all kinds of arenas, with both “progressive” and “conservative” and other ideological systems as well:

• within organizations
• between organizations
• in the media
• to/with political figures
• in public meetings
• on youtube/internet

The Challenge:

The most challenging part of this call to civil discourse is its demand that we live up to a higher standard than those with whom we must work - those same people who threaten society and harm the common good. We must empathize with their pain and learn how they came to be so hurt, and as we try to help them come back to a compassionate and responsible citizenship, we must not aim to "beat" them, but rather to treat them with compassion even as we use our strength to protect society from them.