Walter G. Moss, in his article from January 2011, “Civility and Political Discourse after the Tucson Shooting”, aptly quoted W.H. Auden on the subject of political discourse. About fifty years ago, Auden wrote, “In a party issue, all parties are agreed as to the nature and justice of the social goal to be reached, but differ in their policies for reaching it. . . . On a party issue it is essential that passions be kept at a low temperature. . . . Rival deputies should be able to dine in each other’s houses; fanatics have no place in party politics.”
Unfortunately, fanaticism, acrimony, and lack of civility in American politics seem to be increasingly problematic. Politicians choosing civility over acrimony and partisan politics would better serve our country and its citizens.
Political Discourse Definition
Discourse refers to written or spoken communication or debate. Such communication about political issues or policies is referred to political discourse.
The Need for Civility in Political Discussion
Civility in political discourse has become increasingly discordant over the last several years. Debate over health care reform prompted especially rancorous and partisan rhetoric. Recent discourse from politicians and the media following the Tucson shootings that critically injured Representative Gabrielle Giffords and killed and wounded others is also testimony to that the lack of civility.
People shout over one another and resort to name-calling in town hall meetings and in political rallies. Our elected officials seem to stick to their party’s talking points which are often partisan and lacking respect for any opposing point of view.
Adelle M. Banks in her August 2009 article, “Love Your Enemies, Civility Advocates Say”, points out that Mark DeMoss,Christian public relations executive and past adviser to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, teamed up with then Democratic consultant Lanny Davis to launch The Civility Project, an online forum with the goal of helping people who disagree be less disagreeable. The principles of the project are to encourage civility in public discourse, promote a demeanor of respect between those who disagree, and to take a firm stand against lack of civility. Such principles can be aptly applied in personal relationships as well as political debate.
Clearly, civil political discourse and bi-partisanship from elected officials is what is needed to affect policies that will benefit our citizens. Undoubtedly, it is what our citizens want and need. According to the article, “Nastiness, Name-calling & Negativity: The Allegheny College Survey of Civility and Compromise in American Politics”, a study was done in April, 2010 proving that there is a universal recognition of the problem and that most people are dissatisfied with the rancor in political discussion.
The study’s survey of 1000 random Americans, showed, among many other facts, that 95% of American citizens feel that civility in politics is vital to a healthy and workable democracy. The survey showed that 87% of Americans feel that it’s possible to disagree about politics respectfully. Other findings of the study show that those who pay close attention to politics are four times more likely to believe the political tone has worsened than those who only pay modest attention to the news and current events.
The study showed that those who listen to radio are more likely to perceive a decline in political civility than those who read newspapers. According to the study, the blame for the decline in civility in political discourse is diverse, but most people blame political parties and the media as being most responsible. The study also determined that liberals are twice as likely to attempt to compromise and find solutions as conservatives are.
A quote from L. Dee Fink’s January 2011 article, “Civility in Political Discourse: Dangerous?”, aptly sums up the situation: “If conservatives and liberals could start searching for what they have in common and identify policies that are best for the nation as a whole, it would totally transform the nature of political discourse in this country. This new, more collaborative kind of discourse would enable us to make major progress toward strengthening our society and our country — progress we are not making at the present time.”
Sources:
Walter G. Moss, LA Progressive: “Civility and Political Discourse After the Tucson Shooting” (accessed 1/10/11)
Allegheny College: “Nastiness, Name-calling & Negativity- The Allegheny College Survey of Civility and Compromise in American Politics” (accessed 1/10/11)
L.D. Fink, The Norman Transcript: “Civility in Political Discourse – Dangerous?” (accessed 1/10/11)
Adelle M. Banks, Religion News Service: “Love Your Enemies, Civility Advocates Say” (accessed 1/10/11)
Join the Conversation