A fifth Frequently Voiced Objection to participating in civil discussion is, like the previous two, based on a wholesale rejection of politics:
Government, politics, public policy—they’ve always struck me as changing too much too fast. And it’s not only that. Whenever I discuss politics, people try to change my position. I don’t think change is very often for the good, and I don’t like it when people try to change my mind, either.
I couldn’t agree more with the first two points. Change is inevitable. And no one appreciates being lectured by people who are themselves incapable of listening. But neither should keep us from discussing politics in a civil way. Quite the opposite: both should encourage us to look for opportunities to do so.
Civil discussion, as I’ve already noted on several occasions, presupposes respect and fairness. So personal attacks, lecturing, and attempts at conversion are off limits. Guidelines and facilitators make sure of that.
Meanwhile, if change is evitable, won’t it always make sense to ask how best to adapt to it? One of the biggest strengths of civil discussion is that it provides ample space to explore change and alternative responses to it.
So civil discussion gives us a rare opportunity to grapple with change—without feeling like we must change in the process.
*Adapted from Adolf G. Gundersen and Suzanne Goodney Lea, Let’s Talk Politics: Restoring Civility Through Exploratory Discussion, Chapter 3.
