Civil Discourse?
I spent a little time this morning on Yahoo's groups for Panama. One poster's obvious hatred for Bush is the catalyst for the following question:
When did we lose the civil discourse in discussing politics?
Comparing Bush to Hitler and the Nazis is something that I used to think only come from ignorance or just plain old venom. However, National Review's Jonah Goldberg summed it up pretty well in an online column back in 2003:
"And that's how I think of all these people who e-mail me insistent that George Bush is a Nazi. They believe they are so important, so noble, their hatred and fear must be rooted things of Great Consequence. It's just so prosaic to hate Republicans. I am better than that. So, Republicans must be Nazis. They must be a threat to the whole world and to the sanctity of everything I hold dear because anything less would not be worth my time. George Bush can't simply be someone I disagree with. No, his popularity must be an indication of mass hysteria, of Nuremberg-style devotion to evil.
So desperate are these people to live in interesting times and play the hero, that they are willing  eager  to topple every significant moral and historical category so they can role play as the Heroes who Would Not Stay Silent. That would be fine if these losers were playing some multisided dice game in their basements. But they're not. There's a war going on and these guys are acting like we're the real enemy. That's not just shameful and stupid, it's unhelpful."
However, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
I see the same problem with people who support Bush. Some use words like "Hitlery" and "Hildebeast" to describe Sen. Hillary Clinton. Whatever one may think of Sen. Clinton, all the name calling doesn't accomplish anything.
There comes a point when a civilization loses it's common courtesies and falls into civil anarchy and frankly, I am worried about it. At some point, you have to work together to do something really important like, oh say, fight a war?
That's why we commit to not using the very words that we find so harmful in the present politicalal discussions of the day.
As my Dad said a long time ago -- "When you sling mud, you lose ground." It's past the time we start taking the high ground and actively remind our fellow conservatives to eliminate the mud slinging.

1 Comments:
Name calling never gets anyone anywhere. A valid description is something else, such as "Clinton was proven a liar by committing perjury before a grand jury". I always liked the name "Bilary", but it was Clinton who told us we'd get a two'fer, so that name is legit as well. Liberals who call Bush "Hitler" give conservatives license to call them "knee-jerk" because they evidence their lack of thought, but more good would be done to question the non-thinkers to make them see they have no defense for such name-calling. They might even feel .... stupid! Alice Kittredge
Post a Comment
<< Home