Just imagine living in Boston during the 1770’s and hearing a buzz everywhere you turn about this pamphlet called “Common Sense?” You finally get your hands on a copy and begin reading it. (Would you believe that at the time everyone actually read? A lot too!) A collection of intellectual statements and a narrative that captures how you feel so perfectly that you would be willing to go to the ends of the earth to make a statement or share it. You can’t wait to go down to the public house and speak on the matters.
One special program developed by The Calvert Library has evolved over several years giving our community the tools to remedy one of our major societal issues, a lack of civil discourse. Nationally we are living through a stretch of the most partisan congressional politics ever. Americans are fighting over political and social issues with a maligning fervor never before seen, treating differing opinions as ignorance. Instead of respecting each other’s right to gather, debate, and discuss issues, we work to stop discussion about topics with which we don’t agree from ever taking place. Simply based on the fear that someone might get offended were a conversation of the sort to take place.
The Calvert library program, designed in this great enlightenment tradition, began through a partnership with local government to get the word out about initiatives important to the public. By 2009 and 2010 the program had evolved into serious mediated dialogue. Different discussions on Faith, Experience, Youth, Community, Land, and Water took place and after a devoted core group of participants developed, they then moved on to the “Facing Our Fences, Naming the Barriers to Community” series, where robust discussions such as “Black Spaces/White Spaces” and a few others raised the series’ profile to the extent that some suggested eliminating the discussions because some people “might get offended.”
Civil Discourse and the planting of the seeds of perspective that would shape a nation took place in any public place that individuals could meet. The American Revolution was planned and implemented with civil exchanges of information in public places all the time. The delegates to the first continental congress learned how to take on and solve life and death issues by going through a sometimes maligning process, but when the smoke cleared, led to civil discourse and inspired these men and women to lay their lives on the line and stand up for their perspective on how government should work and how the public good should thrive.
Does this tradition of civil discourse thrive today? I am saddened to suggest it does not. Unfortunately the idea of discourse at all is shunned. In the age of 30 second sound bites and harsh “us-or-them” hyper-partisanship, talking with people who have different beliefs then ourselves seems to be a waste of time. Historically, civil discourse led to a means of solving issues that have differing perspectives through consensus. The definition of civil discourse has changed in modern society though. The idea of civil discourse today is to teach us how to have a conversation again. How to share different ideas and walk away with mutual respect and understanding even when we don’t agree.
A large contributor to this lack of civil discourse is lack of venue. Where do we go for these lively intellectual discussions? Everything is done online now wher
