As mentioned in The Drudge Report and shown in videos on CNN and YouTube, a Town Hall Meeting featuring Senator John Kerry at the University of Florida, during which he invited students to “share a dialogue”, turned out to be anything but routine when University of Florida student Andrew Meyer approached the microphone to address the Senator. What ensued was a cause, at the very least, for dismay on all sides. It is reported that Meyer exceeded a time limit imposed on students for asking questions. Meyer was led away by police, restrained, tasered and arrested - the charges being that he disturbed the peace and resisted arrest. If this is the best we can do in having a dialogue with each other, we, as individuals and as a nation, are in very sad shape. It brings to mind a song, “Is This America?” by Eric Gnezda. Our answer? We would hope - on all sides - that we could dialogue better than this. We believe we can. We believe we must.
Everyone has their own thoughts and memories of this day, and each of us is experiencing this anniversary in our own way. My colleague, Tomas Spath, and I each spent a portion of the day doing speaking engagements on behalf of the Institute for Civility in Government - Tomas up in Crockett, Texas and myself down in Texas City. I don’t know, but I wonder if the invitations to speak on this particular date were entirely coincidental. It seemed incredibly appropriate to remember our loss and pain by doing our best to improve our intentional dialogue with one another - so that even as we acknowledge our political differences, we also work to foster an attitude and behavior of mutual respect that helps us become the best nation we can be.
While we have not yet discovered who came up with the idea that August should be designated as National Win with Civility Month, we are grateful for every effort to draw our attention to the need to be civil. I just wonder about the use of the phrase “win with”. While the idea of “win with” was probably included as added incentive to be civil, if someone wins it tends to imply that someone else loses. Wouldn’t it be nice if just being civil was considered incentive enough on its own, its own reward, with no winning or losing attached? Then we would all be better off - and hence “winners” all around.
For some time now we have felt the Institute is part of a larger synergy as more and more people join in on civility concerns. One recent example is Lou Dobbs, who appears on CNN, and who is a columnist for Money magazine and U.S. News and World Report. He also has a news radio report.
Dobbs sights special interest groups as one of the polarizing factors within the political landscape today, and calls on national leaders to play a strong rule in countering that polarization. In a recent article, Dobbs wrote, “American society is increasingly polarized, our politics ever more fractious, and I believe most of us are figuring out that we spend far too much time and energy dwelling on our differences rather than embracing the similarities and commonalities that unite us as Americans.”
Differences are real, and need to be recognized. They enrich and inform and shape our lives as we live in community. But if we don’t also celebrate and build on our commonalities, our differences may literally tear us apart.
Jim Wallis is a well known member of the Christian community. The Sojourners community of which he is a part is focused on social justice ministries in the Washington, DC area. Through publications, networking and public speaking, Wallis encourages people across the nation to be active in social justice as well. For years we’ve read his articles and we’ve always put him in the “liberal” camp.
So when we read Mr. Wallis’ take on abortion we were surprised. It’s interesting how we automatically place people in different camps when in reality we are more complex than the labels we so often use to define one another.
We have to listen in more than sound bites, read in more than just headlines, and stay present with one another in more than a passing glance if we are ever to understand the complexities behind the positions and opinions each of us holds. When we allow each other to express the full range of what we believe, there is a good chance we will find things we can agree on. The trick is to remain truly civil when we come across those issues upon which we simply cannot agree.
Because the truth is, people are like onions. There are layers and layers of experience, opinion, and truth in all of us.
So while you may think civility sounds like a nice concept, have you ever wondered how it really works? What actually makes civility possible in this crazy, diverse, and often times angry world we live in?
Our new book, Reclaiming Civility in the Public Square - 10 Rules That Work, could just as easily be called “True Life Civility Stories and the Rules That Make Them Possible” because this book is not mere theory. Each rule is illustrated with true stories, and while the book focuses on government and the public sector, the rules can be applied to everything from personal relations (across the kitchen table?) to international diplomacy….
Find Reclaiming Civility in the Public Square on Amazon.com and many other book-selling websites - and share it with a friend!
Reclaiming Civility in the Public Square on Amazon.com
Rev. Al Sharpton “praised this firing and said it is time to change the culture of publicly degrading other people.”Here is an opportunity for all of us to look at our own behavior. Who is not uncivil at times? We all lose our composure from time to time. But will the firing of one influential man be enough to change the culture of degrading people?
Dictionary.com defines opportunity as a chance for progress or advancement.
So thanks to Mr. Imus, we have a chance to progress or advance in the way we relate to one another. But already, extremes are beginning to emerge. Many are being very intentional in expressing their support for Imus via a radiothon fund raiser on his program. Conversely, others are calling for better behavior from public figures in our society.
Is change in the air? I doubt it. Change comes when a majority calls for better behavior in all our circles - at our children’s baseball and soccer games, at the city council, at the barber’s shop, at the theaters, on our city streets, and in the courtroom. Those changes will only occur when we as a society change and quit condoning degrading behavior.
What do you think?
Many times when we speak to each other one will say something that another will take offense at. Such occurred when Radio Talk Show Host Don Imus called the players on the Rutgers University women’s basketball team “nappy headed hos.”
Civility matters and when we don’t follow civil rules of engagement, we can cause hurt on the other side. Sometimes one asks for forgiveness, as Imus later did.
But if you read the article, you’ll see an interesting question posed by Gregory Lee, an NABJ officer and senior assistant sports editor at The Boston Globe. He said the mea culpa did little to atone for the comments. “You can apologize, but what does that mean when you have a history of making disparaging remarks about people?” Lee asked about the acid-tongued Imus.
This is a good question. Once the hurtful words are spoken, their long-term effect on individuals or a whole society cannot be controlled.
And if one apologizes for one’s remark but then does not change one’s behavior, is the apology real?
Civility matters…..and the sooner we all learn to live in a world of civil engagement, the better off we will all be.
Ann Coulter, commentator and author, is famous not only for her opinions, but for the way she expresses them. She has stirred up controversy once again, and for that very reason - not the position that she took, necessarily, but the way she stated it when she referred to presidential candidate John Edwards as a “faggot”. It created a firestorm of media coverage, including CNN and FOX News as but two examples.Ann is not the only commentator known for a brash and uncivil tone. People with similar styles are found on both sides of the political aisle. One commentator pointed out that while Ann is frequently sited by Democrats for her uncivil tone, Republicans could charge Bill Maher with many of the same kind of uncivil comments.
While some people may think that those who are concerned about language that labels and taunts are simply too uptight - and need to just get over it - we are among those who believe that words are formative, and we all need to be careful how they are used. What one person understands merely as free and strong expression of opinion, never to be acted on outside of a voting booth, others may take to be permission or rationale for more than mere verbal attack.
And one wonders - on both sides of the aisle - does being outrageous increase credibility, or merely drown out the sound of reasoned discussion? Maybe drowning out the voice of reasoned discussion is the whole point. Either way, it is cause for concern.
The Institute is grateful to be a part of a larger synergy that is steadily growing in this country - a synergy for all of us to rediscover, reclaim, and rejoice in true community. Part of that synergy was made visible in late February when Stillman College hosted a 4 day conference examining the history and use of the “n-word”. As reported by CNN - Organizers said the goal of the event is to challenge the use of the n-word “through the use of intelligent dialogue and a thorough examination of black history.” Seehttp://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/24/nword.conference.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
The Stillman Conference is part of a larger conversation taking place on this subject among recording artists, city councils, educators, the media, and members of Congress. A website, http://www.abolishthenword.com/, is dedicated to this cause as well.
We are grateful for any serious conversation that seeks to educate, heighten awareness, and work for change in language and actions that have caused incalculable loss, pain and damage through the years. Understanding that words are formative and often take on a life of their own is essential to civility. We must choose our words at the deepest level of caring.