A Priceless Gift We Can Give to Others
As I listened to the political debate, one thing stood out above all else: the lack of civility among the candidates. In fact, they were rude and condescending to one another. It seemed that the debate was more about personal attacks and mud-slinging than disagreements over policy issues. How politics have changed since the first televised presidential debate in 1960!
The 1960 presidential race pitted Vice-President Richard Nixon against Senator John F. Kennedy. It was the first time the American public had the opportunity to see and hear presidential candidates discuss political issues on live television and was watched by millions. The majority of people listening by radio thought that Mr. Nixon won the debate, but people who watched the contest on television believed that Mr. Kennedy carried the day.
Kennedy and Nixon hold final debate, Oct. 21, 1960. Credit: AP. Copyright: 1960 AP
The contrast between the demeanor of the candidates then and today’s political contenders could not be greater. In 1960, both candidates showed respect for each other. Although they vigorously disagreed over policy matters, their attitude toward each other was one of mutual respect. Both candidates realized that one would become president of the United States and they did not want to make the winner’s job more difficult by undermining his credibility. I can only assume that their love of country steered them away from personal attacks.
Today’s political arena is far different. The candidates’ verbal assaults on their opponents, in an attempt to discredit them, are highly personal in nature. Policy issues are often relegated to a secondary status, if mentioned at all. In today’s world, political debates are more like watching professional wrestling than serious conversations between potential leaders of the free world.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie during the Republican Presidential Primary Debate hosted by NewsNation on Wednesday, Dec. 6, 2023
The rough and tumble world of political rancor is not going away anytime soon. The negative personal attacks apparently work, and since they do, ambitious politicians will keep using them.
What troubles me is that the vitriol that permeates the political debate stage has poisoned the public space, so that citizens are hesitant to openly discuss politics. Friends have told me they stay away from loved ones during the holidays for fear that the subject of politics will surface, potentially igniting a civil war between family members.
The issues that our country faces concern all of us. These are incredibly complex and difficult times, not only for our country but for the entire world. Frankly, I don’t see how we can remain silent when so much is at stake. We need to engage with our friends and loved ones about the issues facing us. But how can we do that without causing hurt feelings or destroying relationships? Is it possible to discuss incredibly difficult issues civilly without ruining everyone’s holidays?
A few weeks ago the conservative New York Times columnist, David Brooks, wrote an article titled, “The Essential Skills for Being Human.” Brooks has observed that over the last few decades people have lost the social skills needed to converse about a litany of sensitive subjects. Unfortunately, our culture has devolved to the point where common courtesies are viewed as undesirable traits or signs of weakness. He aims to reintroduce us to ways by which we can more constructively interact with one another.
New York Times columnist, David Brooks
Although Brooks does not directly address the political divide in our country, I found his article extremely helpful in providing insights in how we might talk to each other about controversial issues without the conversation turning ugly. I do think that much of the acrimony that exists in our culture could be avoided, or at least reduced, if public discourse was given a refresher course in basic manners. If more of us can learn some fundamental interpersonal skills, maybe we can discuss serious matters without losing self-control.
Liana Finck, NY Times
Brooks emphasizes that “Above almost any other need, human beings long to have another person look into their faces with love and acceptance.” Much of the anger in political disagreement is triggered by a lack of respect and love for the person with whom we are in conversation. “Respect is like air,” Brooks notes, “when it’s present nobody notices it; when it’s absent it’s all anybody can talk about.”
The first rule of engagement, then, with someone who has a different point-of-view is to show respect for them. To respect the person means to seek to understand why a person believes a certain way. That means we must take the time to listen attentively to what he/she is saying. There is a reason why our friend or loved one believes what they do. Try to grasp the “why,” and reaffirm to the one you are engaged with in dialogue that you really want to understand. If you are having difficulty grasping the “why,” ask the person to explain further to help you understand his/her perspective. The more you reach out, the greater the odds that you will defuse a potentially tense situation. Brooks adds, “True understanding is one of the most generous gifts we can give to another.”
In my own experience, I have found that when I’m more interested in what I’m saying than what the other person is saying, the discussion can rapidly turn cold or even hostile. But when I look into the other person’s eyes, listen attentively, show respect, and ask relevant questions, I can gain a friend, even if the disagreement can’t be resolved. If I can help someone feel respected, valued, and understood, then perhaps both of us will be enlightened.
The point of a disagreement about a sensitive issue should not be to humiliate the other person or even win the argument, but to create an environment of understanding for further dialogue. People need time to digest what has been said, but if you alienate the other person, you permanently close the door for further dialogue. Perhaps after we have given our best shot at truly and honestly trying to understand what the other person believes, we will find ourselves still unable to agree. Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree. Still, our disagreement should focus on substantive matters, not hear-say or personal attacks.
I wish I could tell you that I’ve never lost a friendship through a disagreement, but I can’t. There were occasions when my pride blinded me to the inherent value of the other person. I wanted to win an argument more than I wanted to build a relationship. I realize now that when I acted in such a way, a little bit of my humanity was lost, for whenever we estrange ourselves from others, we distance ourselves from God. And when we are estranged from God, we are prone to forget the incomprehensible dignity of other human beings.
Many of us are looking for gifts we can give to our loved ones and friends during this holiday season. It could be that the most priceless gift we can give to another this Christmas is our understanding. The gift of understanding another human being will bring a little joy to their corner of the world! And isn’t that what these holy days are all about?
