We are becoming a nation of people who don’t talk to each other. A survey last October by the Pew Research Center found that 53% of Americans say talking about politics with people they disagree with is “stressful and frustrating.” That’s up from 46% in a similar survey two years earlier.
That’s a distressing phenomenon. On one level, it threatens to weaken communities. I’ve met many people over the last two years who said they won’t broach politics with their neighbors – or who won’t talk to their neighbors at all – for fear of the conflict that might ensue.
On another, it’s just bad for democracy. When we stop exploring our differences, when we resist listening to those with whom we disagree, we tend to fall into an us vs. them trap. Civil discourse collapses. Polarization, tribalism, and distrust take over civic life.
At The Monitor, we’ve heard from a few folks recently who object to our decision to invite State Rep. Greg DeVries to write a monthly column for this “Surveying the Views” page. “I will not be renewing my subscription as long as DeVries is given a platform for his morality rants,” wrote one (soon-to-be-former) reader.
I’m not surprised: We knew that Rep. DeVries is a lightning rod. In last fall’s campaign, he made no secret of his vehement opposition to abortion, to any form of gun control, and to most state and federal government functions. As a legislator, he has been exactly true to his word, sponsoring (unsuccessful) bills that would have defined personhood to include “mankind at any stage of development” and eliminated compulsory school attendance, respectively. He has denounced so-called “Solutions Caucus” Republicans who broke ranks with their party to vote with Democrats on several issues.
It’s important that DeVries’ constituents in Jefferson County – including the 57.4% who supported his candidacy – understand why he has taken these positions. It’s also critical that DeVries understand why a large chunk of the people he represents oppose his approach. That feedback loop is essential to democratic function: It helps ensure both more informed voting and policymaking that better reflects the will of those voters.
Will DeVries suddenly change his mind as a result? Will his critics? Not likely – but that’s not the point. What’s more important, I think, is that we resist seeing the world in terms of black and white, right and wrong, here and everywhere else – and fight the current culture of blame and demonization that sabotages problem-solving.
Let’s take the time and trouble to listen respectfully to those whose views are in conflict with ours, to understand where they’re coming from, and to acknowledge their humanity. Doing so can help create the context for constructive dialogue around a shared sense of possibility.
