I greatly admire your definition of civility and appreciate your perspective on so many things. And, I respectfully disagree with your philosophical position here. People are hurting. Our values are being tested as a nation and within our own communities and neighborhoods. Standing up for each other...standing up for what we believe in, with integrity, respect, and fortitude, is the only thing that will protect humanity.
It is not about if we engage, it is how. For me, that's what the heart of civility is. Courageous, respectful conversation to advance the ultimate goal of staying connected across our differences.
Yes, it's exhausting. It's overwhelming. I too am a working parent hanging on by a thread. I know it is tempting to dismiss engagement in tough conversations as "too political", but the truth is that only those who are unaffected directly have the ability to step away. Protections and support systems for vulnerable people are being withdrawn. We cannot stand by. I for one am staying engaged in the conversation - in alignment with my beliefs - and my character won't let me withdraw. I hope you consider re-evaluating your own engagement and use your platform to support people doing the same.
I think we also need to accept what people now like to call "politics", as a way to disdain the discussion, are actually "values". Should people not be able to talk about or live their values for fear someone will condemn them for "talking politics"?
This is lovely. More people need to understand this! My go-to comment - which most people have heard from me too often lately is some variant of "I find discussing politics distateful." Or "remember when we were in high school and it was considered rude to talk about politics?" (I'm that old...) It isn't that politics doesn't matter. It is that people matter MORE.
Bauman writes super interestingly about this invasion of the private by the public in his great book Liquid Modernity: “The boundary between the private and the public has been redrawn — and not necessarily to the benefit of either. The private has been made public, and the public has been privatized.” It appears to me that we are witnessing the culmination of this.
The problem today is that what is of civil value to one might not be for another. Thus civility can and will be lost if one's values are held hard to mind and while also held in the heart in any interaction.
“but it’s just the ‘definition of a woman’ stuff that gets me, you know?” …but is this “politics” or the most fundamental consideration of biological reality (while accepting exceptions as exceptions, not the rule)…?? Values. Unfortunately, degenerate-Communist-Weimar ideas have become mainstream once again and it is beyond politics. There are shared-common-basic values, then there's politics.
Remember, our Ancient Greeks & Romans distinguished their (our) entire civilization on their creation of marriage—the union of one man & one woman creating sustainable families as the basis of society—when much of the world practised polygamy as a norm; this wasn't politics, this was the basis of absolutely everything from religion to government. Remember what started the Trojan War.
This 1000%. I'm so, so tired of people assuming what my political views are, and giving me these knowing, nudge-nudge-wink-wink comments related to politics that come out of nowhere, when we've never discussed politics and they've never once asked me my opinion. It's as if just looking a certain way, or living in a certain neighborhood, or having a certain level of education gives everyone carte blanche to make Assumptions. And I assure you, the Assumptions are never accurate.
Thank you for this essay. You are not alone in your search for civility, civil discussion, and reasonable disagreement. In his book "American Covenant," Yuval Levin observed that the "breakdown of political culture in our day is not a function of our having forgotten how to agree with each other but of our having forgotten how to disagree constructively." Neil Gorsuch and Janie Nitze spoke to the issue in "Over Ruled" (an outstanding book, by the way), when they cited journalist George Packer: "when politics becomes a perpetual tribal war, ends justify almost any means and individuals are absolved from the constraints of normal decency."
Civil dialogue over differences is the engine of democracy; we must disagree to debate, and we must debate to decide. In disagreement, there is learning, but, as they say, there is no learning in the second kick of a mule. As you have said, Ms. Hudson, "Civility...is the basic respect and consideration that we are owed, and owe to other members of the human community."
I greatly admire your definition of civility and appreciate your perspective on so many things. And, I respectfully disagree with your philosophical position here. People are hurting. Our values are being tested as a nation and within our own communities and neighborhoods. Standing up for each other...standing up for what we believe in, with integrity, respect, and fortitude, is the only thing that will protect humanity.
It is not about if we engage, it is how. For me, that's what the heart of civility is. Courageous, respectful conversation to advance the ultimate goal of staying connected across our differences.
Yes, it's exhausting. It's overwhelming. I too am a working parent hanging on by a thread. I know it is tempting to dismiss engagement in tough conversations as "too political", but the truth is that only those who are unaffected directly have the ability to step away. Protections and support systems for vulnerable people are being withdrawn. We cannot stand by. I for one am staying engaged in the conversation - in alignment with my beliefs - and my character won't let me withdraw. I hope you consider re-evaluating your own engagement and use your platform to support people doing the same.
Good reflection in a time when political things have become a religion partly because ours is an ideological nation.
I think we also need to accept what people now like to call "politics", as a way to disdain the discussion, are actually "values". Should people not be able to talk about or live their values for fear someone will condemn them for "talking politics"?
No one needs your values in a three minute conversation, especially when that one person is working .
I was referring to discussions with people you know, not random encounters. I apologize for not being clear.
This is lovely. More people need to understand this! My go-to comment - which most people have heard from me too often lately is some variant of "I find discussing politics distateful." Or "remember when we were in high school and it was considered rude to talk about politics?" (I'm that old...) It isn't that politics doesn't matter. It is that people matter MORE.
Bauman writes super interestingly about this invasion of the private by the public in his great book Liquid Modernity: “The boundary between the private and the public has been redrawn — and not necessarily to the benefit of either. The private has been made public, and the public has been privatized.” It appears to me that we are witnessing the culmination of this.
Politics happens when three or more folks get together
The problem today is that what is of civil value to one might not be for another. Thus civility can and will be lost if one's values are held hard to mind and while also held in the heart in any interaction.
“but it’s just the ‘definition of a woman’ stuff that gets me, you know?” …but is this “politics” or the most fundamental consideration of biological reality (while accepting exceptions as exceptions, not the rule)…?? Values. Unfortunately, degenerate-Communist-Weimar ideas have become mainstream once again and it is beyond politics. There are shared-common-basic values, then there's politics.
Remember, our Ancient Greeks & Romans distinguished their (our) entire civilization on their creation of marriage—the union of one man & one woman creating sustainable families as the basis of society—when much of the world practised polygamy as a norm; this wasn't politics, this was the basis of absolutely everything from religion to government. Remember what started the Trojan War.
This 1000%. I'm so, so tired of people assuming what my political views are, and giving me these knowing, nudge-nudge-wink-wink comments related to politics that come out of nowhere, when we've never discussed politics and they've never once asked me my opinion. It's as if just looking a certain way, or living in a certain neighborhood, or having a certain level of education gives everyone carte blanche to make Assumptions. And I assure you, the Assumptions are never accurate.
Thank you for this essay. You are not alone in your search for civility, civil discussion, and reasonable disagreement. In his book "American Covenant," Yuval Levin observed that the "breakdown of political culture in our day is not a function of our having forgotten how to agree with each other but of our having forgotten how to disagree constructively." Neil Gorsuch and Janie Nitze spoke to the issue in "Over Ruled" (an outstanding book, by the way), when they cited journalist George Packer: "when politics becomes a perpetual tribal war, ends justify almost any means and individuals are absolved from the constraints of normal decency."
Civil dialogue over differences is the engine of democracy; we must disagree to debate, and we must debate to decide. In disagreement, there is learning, but, as they say, there is no learning in the second kick of a mule. As you have said, Ms. Hudson, "Civility...is the basic respect and consideration that we are owed, and owe to other members of the human community."
Got it! I agree with your stance on this issue...
There are only nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, unless you were taking about one of the states' supreme courts.
I included the retired Justices as a courtesy.