Columns

“We are as divided as ever.”

This week we mourne.

A core level of trust in the decency, sincerity and virtue our fellow citizens, no matter how deeply we dislike and disagree with them, is one of the foundational necessities of a free, democratic society.

With the Kavanaugh scream-fest behind us, it’s back to everyday blood-letting. And without a tacitly-agreed theme, the polarizers have to stretch.

But while it’s easy to celebrate the power of polarization when your side wins, it’s worth remembering the cost, which is freedom.

The “he said/she said” dueling testimony of Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh poured even more fuel into our already raging polarization fire.

As the legislative branch has slowly ceded more and more power to the judicial branch, the highest court in the land has increasingly become a political battleground.

Elissa Slotkin, a candidate for Congress, assumed voters would be most interested in her position on the issues. What she discovered was that they are even more interested in finding a way to return to civility in politics.

A term popping up in the pundit chatter that is conspicuous in its refreshing banality: “Likeability.”

Polarization cuts across party lines because polarization is not about ideology, it’s about power.

Instead of comparing examples of polarization, we’ll look at an article by New York Times opinion writer Margaret Renki that addresses one of the trickier problems of polarization.

Can the language of reasonable, respectful, even if passionate, disagreement find a place in this environment?

The rhetoric of polarization (incredibly!) heated up even more.

Civility is the language of resolving disagreement in a free society, much as the process of law is the language of seeking justice in a fair society.

As we were supposed to be celebrating the birthday of our nation, all the techniques of polarization that undermine the democratic process were there in shameful abundance.

Looking over the June highlights, certain patterns may not be obvious, but are actually clear.

Political discourse has slipped from disagreement to insult to profanity to physical action.

The expletive heard ‘round the world!

As we reflect on the 50TH anniversary of the murder of Robert Kennedy, and remember the terrible divisions in our country of that time, the poem so often quoted back then, Yeats’ “The Second Coming,” seems chillingly appropriate today.

Close-mindedness of both atheist and religious dogmatists “amounts to an imprisonment so total that the prisoner doesn’t even know he’s locked up.”

As we celebrate Memorial Day, we review the past month’s parade of polarization.

The only real surprise is that the latest school shooting grabbed the attention of the polarizers and finger-pointers as we might have expected.

We “learn” how the left has lost is mind, Republicans are sadists, Democrat officeholders are prone to sexual abuse, libertarians are self-indulgent hypocrites and so much more.

The degradation of the process of democracy continues as thoughtful airing and arguing of disagreements continues to give way to tribal name calling, finger pointing and accusing.

It’s a good thing we don’t have any serious problems to resolve, or we wouldn’t have time to have this much fun eviscerating each other.

No one can deny that Donald Trump is polarizing – this is his modus operandi, beginning with name calling. Is this a cost we can afford?

The degeneracy of rational discourse into name calling and finger pointing undermines not just one side but both sides of the argument.

A simple guide on how to disagree “well” that is, productively.