In a speech to the Harvard graduating class of 1968, Mrs. Coretta Scott King wrote, just four years after the death of her husband, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and later that of Robert F. Kennedy, these words: “As young people, as students, your lives have been profoundly affected by the loss of these champions of liberty, justice, human dignity, and peace. In a society intoxicated by power, where the means become the ends and violence the favorite pastime, we are moving rapidly toward self-destruction. Your generation must raise its voice in righteous indignation against the forces that seek to destroy us.” This speech assumed that the First Amendment right to freedom of expression would prevail.
However, it appears recently that only the kind of speech that fits a certain narrative will be allowed; on mainstream news, social media, magazines, digital, and paper news sources. Even when peer-reviewed factual news is reported, the ability to cut out and cannibalize just the tidbits that support a single side are used. This frustration at the lie is increasing the frustration among our citizenry and lowering the standard of civility in the United States of America. You might say, “what evidence do you have that supports your claims?” : lawlessness like no other time in my 67 years, division among races like pre-civil rights law signed by Lyndon B. Johnson, July 2, 1964. Further, by the demand of people to not buy from, or sell to, or acknowledge the speech of certain individuals. All while letting rabid, slanderous speech toward others be allowed, praised, and encouraged. This lack of civility is demonstrated in our classrooms, in our marketplace, in our capital by various nefarious characters shooting up, storming the cities of our nation, looting stores of hard-working independent owners, ambushing police, and out and out lying and spinning the lie as if it was not a lie. We saw a representative shot at a softball game, we have seen high-level people on both sides of the aisle do egregious illegal acts with children and no one is indicting them on it. We have seen a recent rollout by a Republican president of an experimental vaccine, while one side of the political spectrum says it is criminal to bring an untested vaccine to people without proper vetting. One side praising said, President. Once the presidency changes, the story flips. This kind of convenient truth type of politics leaves the working class frustrated and feeling helpless. We are not, read on.
Over the past 54 years, we’ve witnessed a shift from pro-life to pro-choice to pro-union to anti-union to pro-Big Pharma to anti-Big Pharma to pro-corporate to anti-corporate. It’s already difficult to distinguish who the “good guys” are. And because of this lack of transparency, this lack of civility, and people’s inability to step out of their comfort zones, we’re experiencing a resurgence of social unrest.
This writer proposes that we restore civility to our discourse, starting with the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Presidency, the governors, and the government, from the top brass down to the state employee, the factory worker, the fast-food worker. That when someone opposes your point of view, you stop and ask yourself, “Will hearing this information kill me?” “If I hear it, do I have to agree with it?” “Does hearing it make me better or worse?” This kind of critical thinking is what’s required. It takes more time at first, but what if the population demonstrated to the government that we’re thinking for ourselves? And when they propose something, we don’t just say, “Hmm, does that sound good?” So we accept it like a robot with an empty mind, but we ask them some questions: for example, let’s say a new policy were proposed to eliminate accountability for all college tuition (which sounds great, right?), even make the pot sweeter, all college free. What questions should we ask? 1) Nothing is free. Who will pay for college professors, campuses, faculty administration, and facility maintenance? Where will that money come from? Who would benefit from such a policy? Who would not benefit? What are the long-term implications of free college on the overall value of education in the United States? Who would be involved in jobs that don’t require college? For example, plumbing, electricity, ditch digging, fast food, etc. What evidence do we have that free college is beneficial? Are there countries that offer free college so that, upon coming to the U.S., a person can pursue a career without having to pursue another degree? If so, where and why are they successful?
As you can see, this particular topic generates wonderful civil, non-violent, and angry debate, and both sides can learn something if they are willing to engage. I have learned so much from my colleagues, friends, and even my younger students without compromising my values, disrespecting them, or allowing anyone to disrespect me. We have been offended because someone disagrees with us; it’s as if we’ve built a barrier where the other can’t connect or reconcile, because the barrier has been so high that we can’t hear each other. I would love your feedback on this article. The goal is to remind us all to reconcile, reunite, and re-educate ourselves. I’m willing, are you?
