[ad_1]
Annelise Capossela for NPR
This is a period of deepening political divisions in the United States, with people at opposite ends of the political spectrum not only disagreeing, but who really do not like the other side . This dislike has been increasing for decades.
In the midst of all this division and aversion are increasing appeals to civility. A poll shows that a majority of Americans say that incivility is a major problem. And a NPR / PBS NewsHour / Marist poll indicates that the civility crisis in the country is worsening and that the majority of Americans fear that this will lead to violence.
But what does civility really mean? This is sometimes defined as being simply polite. It comes from the Latin root civilized, meaning "worthy of a citizen". It is a term that comforts some and is repressive for others. And although, yes, it may refer to politeness, it's much more than that.
"Civility is the basis of the respect we owe each other in public life," said Keith Bybee, author of How Civility Works.. "And when people talk about a civility crisis, they usually signal their feeling that there is no common understanding of what this basic respect should be."
At the present time, this social contract – a common agreement on what an appropriate public behavior looks like and deserves respect – feels shattered. No one can hear the facts, let alone how to argue or what to argue about. With a president using terms such as "loser", "stupid as a rock" and "big pig" to describe his critics and "animals" to describe undocumented immigrants, it seems like the tone for the naughty behavior that permeates everyday life put in Washington.
Mike Pompeo does a great job, I'm very proud of him. His predecessor, Rex Tillerson, lacked the mental capacity. He was silly like a rock and I could not get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy like hell. Now, it's a brand new match, a great spirit at State!
– Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 7, 2018
Some accuse the Democrats, others the media – and many accuse President Trump.
For some, this deep sense of division and disgust evokes a danger. What is at stake?
"The success of the country," says Jonathan Haidt, social psychologist at the Stern School of Business at New York University. "When we do not trust each other, it means it's very hard for politicians to compromise, it's very difficult to find win-win solutions or positive-sum games, and there's so much problems that we could solve ", but we do not
"We become gullible, we become easily manipulated by our foreign enemies and our democracy becomes what – a beacon for the world about what not to do," he says.
The arrival of social media did not help, says Haidt. He sees it as an accelerator to spit indignation and anger faster and further into the world. It's a tool that has allowed powerless people to overthrow dictators, but it's also a tool used to manipulate, deceive and, well, be horrible to internet users anonymously.
But the United States has gone through even more divided times – from the founding of the country to civil war, to the civil rights movement and to the Vietnam War.
Not only has the country lasted, but sometimes the result of all this supposed incivility has been a rewrite of this social contract to make it more inclusive of people who had been sidelined and fired in the past.
"When you have people whose behavior is in flagrant contradiction with a dominant consensus on what constitutes appropriate conduct, it is those who are deemed unbearably rude," says author Bybee. "I mean, it was a critique of the civil rights movement in the middle of the twentieth century when you organized these sit-ins, which were a way to demand a legislative change."
At the time, these sit-ins were fired, he said, as an "affront to racial etiquette". In the late 1800s and early 1900s, women seeking the right to vote were uncivilized. Rosa Parks? Rude. AIDS activists with ACT UP protest in a dramatic and disruptive way? Rude. Black lives matter? Rude.
"Civility has been to ensure that the status quo, the status quo hierarchy at the moment, which means racial inequality, gender inequality, class inequality, remains permanent," said Lynn Itagaki, associate professor at the University of Toronto. 39, University of Missouri writes about what she calls civil racism. It defines it as the maintenance of civility to the detriment of racial equality.
It's a tough term, she says. He takes up the echoes of this historical and bigoted definition of the civilized in relation to the savage.
Itagaki says that this moment may be like a crisis, but when people ask for the restoration of civility, who can define it? Who can rewrite the social contract?
At present, hate crimes and hate groups are on the rise. The Southern Poverty Law Center criticizes the president for raising fears over a country that is becoming less white and for having triggered a racially-based debate on immigration.
Calls to civility may resemble an effort to quell people's outrage at injustice or hatred, because civility can be a tool to build or a weapon to silence.
"For what purpose will civility be used, will it be more inclusive?" Itagaki asks. "Will that mean you are bringing more voices into political debates, or are you using civility as a way to return to the old hierarchies and the status quo since the founding of the American republic, where you do not have a voice? Did a white man have free owners who could vote? "
So for some, the time has come to step back and be courteous. For others, it is imperative to be uncivil in a way that has led to social justice in the past.
[ad_2]
Source link