Talk amongst yourselves

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

By Richard Anderson

A bumper sticker currently in wide circulation reads, “Dissent is patriotic.” True. I’d also count it among those inalienable rights the Founding Fathers were so hot under the collar about preserving. If it were not, how would Congress debate? How would state legislators oppose a governor’s plan? How would you make your own thoughts and feelings known to your representatives, your Town Elders, your spouse? Granted, it may feel like beating your head against a wall when the person or people or institution you’re trying to talk to dismisses what you have to say almost before it’s out of your mouth, but you’ve still got the right – the imperative – to let people know how you think about things.

Exercising our right of free speech is patriotic, too, and essential to democracy. Having the gumption to speak up – and, one hopes, the eloquence necessary to make your point clearly and concisely – is not only a virtue in politics, but something we admire in daily discourse, too. It’s simple communication. We need to be able to say what we want, what we need, how we feel, or else we are bound to go without. Why should that be any different when it comes to discussing politics, government, decisions about going to war, about how to spend our tax dollars? It shouldn’t of course.

Of course, not everyone is as well-spoken as Daniel Webster or Atticus Finch. Some may hog the podium, yakking on and on. Some may take a labyrinthine approach to their point. Others may be so blunt that they offend. But we all agree that eloquence should not a prerequisite to joining the conversation any more than class or breeding.
When the subject at hand is particularly emotional – the war in Iraq, say, and who said what that got us stuck in this mire, and whether certain statements were accurate or inaccurate, intentional or unintentional, well-meaning or criminal – well, we all recognize how emotions can impede communication.

The mature, adult, civil thing to do is to listen and to do our best to understand what is being said before we rush to judgment or interrupt with our own (always vastly more important and relevant) thoughts on the matter. That’s just simple dinner-table conversation courtesy, don’t you think?

So, while last weekend’s peace rally (yes, we’re still harping on that; have you seen the letters column in this week’s Planet?) might have stirred emotions, might have ended on a note some found dissonant. But here we are, still talking about it, still asking questions, still looking for answers. Some of the more rancorous comments notwithstanding, that’s how it’s supposed to happen. That’s the conversation that has to take place.

That’s the process we ought to go through to figure out where we stand on the issues so that when we do go into the voting booth to cast our ballot to throw the bums out or hold the line we are as informed as we can be.

PERMALINK:
Talk amongst yourselves | Planet JH News Article: Editorial

Leave a Comment