By Marsha Sutton
Source: Carmel Valley News
The historic election of Barack Obama, our nation’s first African-American president, brings to a close this long, tortuous period of endless presidential politics. Although over-saturated by the barrage of coverage, many of us are justifiably moved that our country has not been swayed by the color of his skin but instead elected a new leader based on the force of his intellect and the promise of his ideals.
Regardless of whether you are now celebrating or miserable over the results, today is a day for rejoicing and for profound gratitude that America and its democracy have brought us to this moment.
But this day has come at a price. We as Americans seem to have lost something of great value along the way. The unfortunate polarization of factions and hyperbolic ranting of extremists on both sides have left us bereft of civility. Insults have replaced respectful conversation, distortions substitute for facts, and reactionary jeering shouts down thoughtful discourse.
Our children are not immune to all this incivility. They watch, they listen, they learn how to behave. And the lessons we are teaching them are not very admirable.
One simple four-letter word seems to have disappeared from our collective behavior, and I’m referring here to the new N-word – NICE.
Where have all the nice people gone? And how do we bring them back?
This is the real crisis in America today, the inability of adults to debate without fighting, to hear the other side without feeling threatened, to retain some semblance of dignity while discussing controversial issues with our neighbors. And most importantly, to protect our children from the downward slide into intolerance and anger.
There are very real troubles that our nation’s next leader must confront – the collapsing economy, a broken health-care system, an expensive war without end, an inadequate education system, environmental crises, an outdated infrastructure and public works system in disrepair – on and on the list goes.
As daunting as these problems are, I am hopeful that, with the right degree of intelligence, creativity and cooperation, every one of these issues can be, if not immediately fixed, then certainly addressed and solutions initiated.
But harder to fix is the underlying problem of our attitude toward one another. How does one leader, any one person, begin to turn back the way we’ve learned to relate?
Our own communities are just as guilty. We live in neighborhoods where people are professionals – intelligent and successful. And yet all too often insults are hurled at one another, name-calling is common, and healthy debate quickly degenerates into conflict and ad hominem attacks.
Ad hominem attacks are so despicable because character flaws, real or imagined, are raised as a way to discredit a person’s views. Attacks on a person’s character have no bearing on whether that person’s beliefs are valid or not. But they are tempting to use because they distract from the issues, are simple to voice, and can be effective in influencing opinion. It is easier to attack someone’s character than it is to think through one’s own positions and engage in rational, reflective discourse.
As a columnist, I receive a great deal of feedback on my topics, and I am grateful when someone writes to me and is able to agreeably disagree. Logical arguments presented to support an opposing view are most welcome; I enjoy the spirited debates. They expand my understanding, help me to solidify my positions, and occasionally convince me to change my mind.
I appreciate these respectful letters not the least because the writers are able to distinguish between me as a person and the views I hold. A brilliantly formulated opinion is quickly dulled by an insulting, personal tone designed to provoke rather than persuade.
I have been called every name in the book, for expressing points of view others don’t share. And in this popular era of blaming journalists and shooting the messenger, exposing unwelcome truths is sometimes labeled as rumors or lies in an attempt to stain the reporter’s credentials.
One need only turn to the Letters section of any newspaper to see repeated examples of this behavior.
Take, for example, a letter published in the Sept. 25 issue of this newspaper from the Del Mar Hills Elementary School’s PTA president. Because she identified herself as such in the letter, the contents of the letter – and its tone – were understood to represent the views of the teachers and parents at that school.
The letter – devoid of logic, soaked with belittling sarcasm, and peppered with misleading distortions – undermined its purpose with a mean-spirited tone that was far more alienating than convincing and reflected poorly upon the author’s organization.
A string of insults is not very persuasive, if the goal is to win people over to your point of view.
But this style is symptomatic of what too often characterizes our debates. We see this all the time – if you can’t win by reason, then slam your opponent with insults and pejorative labeling.
In my university philosophy classes 30 years ago, we learned to argue – argue, meaning to present well-researched arguments, employing logic and “proofs” to offer compelling opinions that engage and respect the audience. Socrates would be appalled to witness how the “art” of argument has degenerated.
Last week, I attended a guest lecture at UCSD featuring San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Page editor Bob Kittle, who is known for his conservative views. His audience, which appeared by a show of hands to be firmly in Barack Obama’s corner, was respectful of Kittle and listened politely as he explained his endorsement of John McCain for president.
And likewise, Kittle listened carefully when one audience member volunteered to state why Obama was appealing.
Kittle even went so far as to argue the other side when one McCain supporter became visibly upset with Obama fans and derided them to a point that bordered on the abusive, for embracing for president a man he said was an inexperienced senator.
Kittle gently reminded the man that there was once another senator with a similarly thin resume who served only two years in the senate before winning the presidency, and he went on to become one of the greatest presidents who ever lived – speaking of Abraham Lincoln, who, Kittle added, happened to be a Republican.
Whether you agree with him or not, Kittle displayed tact and respect for his audience – a rare trait these days that compelled me to listen carefully when he offered his views on a number of 2008 election issues that were often contrary to those I hold.
After the 9/11 attack, America came together in a way I’ve not seen before – or since. We gave one another a collective group hug – whether on the telephone, in the grocery store, or on the freeway where drivers were startlingly polite.
Does it take a national tragedy for people to realize that each of us deserves respect? Just because one may support Obama and one McCain does not mean that either person is stupid, mean, blind or pathetic – all terms I’ve heard used this campaign season.
Disagreeing with one another is healthy and constructive. How do we know what’s right for us if we can’t understand what the other side is about? And how can we learn about the issues if some of us insist upon criticizing other people’s values rather than simply the positions they hold?
We set examples for our children every minute of every day, and kids need to learn how to understand all sides of an issue, listen with an open mind, sort out what makes sense for them, and defend their positions with intelligence and respect.
May the next president set such an example – for adults as well as the children.
