Good public discourse, open dialogue and discussion in the marketplace of ideas, is a staple of democracy. Without it there is no chance for government of, by, and for the people.
For good public discourse to take place certain requisites or attributes must be put in place within the body politic.
--People must embrace, then instill in culture and government, basic human rights: freedom of worship, freedom of speech, even expression, right to life, law, and order based on a public moral consensus.
--People who believe in objective truth.
--Freedom of expression must be recognized, protected, and preserved in law.
--People must respect others, which is to say, they must listen, which is to say, a certain discourse etiquette must be established.
--Absence of decorum in public discourse is a seed of the destruction of the marketplace of ideas.
--Discourse depends upon not necessarily an educated public, in the sense of formal schooling though this is good, but upon an informed public.
--For discourse to result in general wellbeing, that is, for democracy to work and for it to last, people must cultivate moral virtue, that is, a capacity to recognize good and to choose it—this only comes in acknowledging the place and purpose of religion.
--For discourse to function freely and productively to good ends, people must understand that disagreement can serve the good if it is based upon critiques of ideas and not upon criticism of ones holding the ideas.
--The degree to which disagreements degenerate to people upon people attacks is the degree to which disagreements no longer serve the public good.
Discourse that is little more than shouting matches, i.e. an absence of decorum, is what most radio and television talk shows have become. It is what much of electioneering or political campaigning has become.
Calling leaders in the political opposition derisive names or using cartoons and other materials to demean members of the political opposition in the name of humor does not credibly advance ones ideas. It’s actually a show of weakness. If you can’t win a point in discussion via moral suasion than you attack the other speaker or posture loudly to out shout the other. Weakness.
It seems today that if you disagree with someone you are ipso facto believed to be attacking the person. So it goes in our politically correct culture. Yet meanwhile and ironically, verbal attacks upon people with whom you disagree have become the order of the day. The American body politic desperately needs to rediscover the values and rules of engagement for discourse modeled by the Founding Fathers.
© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2011
*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.