Talking Politics: There is a Better Way

Political discourse in this country is in critical condition. Too often, civil disagreement has given way to shouting matches between co-workers, friends, and family members. One in six Americans reports a broken relationship over politics. We lack a model for engaging others who have different political and religious values. Tragically, we often dismiss those who disagree with us as irrelevant or, worse, worthy of contempt.

Yet, one of America’s greatest strengths is our rich diversity. Many groups contribute to our diversity: racial, ethnic, religious, socio-economic, political, age-demographic. As is often the case, however, the greatest strength can be the most significant challenge or threat. As varying worldviews collide in our communities, state, and nation, our perspectives inevitably are challenged. How do we respond in a way that allows us to live together in society yet upholds our own moral and intellectual integrity?

In his book, Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt, Arthur C. Brooks lays out a roadmap for Americans who seek something better than the current state of political discourse. To achieve this, he contends, our goal can not be civility or tolerance. Counterintuitively, Brooks states that if we want to realize national healing, we must learn to disagree better. Respectful, vigorous disagreement causes the best ideas to surface and compete for center stage, illustrating British philosopher John Stuart Mill's famous marketplace of ideas principle. Society as a whole benefits as ideas compete for acceptance, Mill asserted, which leads to improved outcomes in business, politics, and relationships. It takes people who refuse to shy away from engaging differing views and to doing so in a way that treats others with dignity.

But how do we have courageous conversations that encourage dynamic, yet respectful, disagreement? Brooks offers some practical guidelines:

1. Never try to insult someone into agreement - Research shows that this tactic tends to cause your ideological opponent to become more entrenched in their views. It is much more effective to identify shared objectives first when making your case. How we arrive at our goals will differ based on ideology, but starting with shared objectives tethers us to a common value. This exercise will sharpen your views while showing that you care about the person you hope to persuade.
2. Never assume another person’s motives - When we believe that our ideological opponent’s motives are evil, we dismiss them and their ideas outright. We feel justified in ignoring their perspective. By engaging another’s ideas, not assuming their motives, we display fairness in the way we treat other people.
3. Use your values as a gift, not as a weapon - The values we hold dear are precious to us. However, when we weaponize our values to harm our ideological opponent, we strip our cherished values of their moral content and further alienate others. Focusing on sharing the beauty of your values while refraining from attacking the one who holds differing opinions can build bridges.

Many Americans hunger for something better, a nation that lives up to the ideals held at our nation’s founding. We must recommit to free speech that encourages vigorous, intelligent disagreement. The author concludes by challenging us with a vision for what we need most in America today: more love, less contempt. If we possess the courage to approach the cultural conversation differently, then President Lincoln’s vision of a nation touched again “by the better angels of our nature” could become reality.