The Course We Are on Has to Change
We must learn to talk with one another.
By Martin Davis
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Email Martin
It is time for a national reckoning about the path we are on as a nation.
When the FXBG Advance started, we did so with a clear, guiding principle. The way we talk about others, matters. We strive to reflect that in our reporting every day, and the New Dominion Podcast started as an exercise in trying to model a better way forward.
We are far from perfect. In truth, we have a long, long way to go.
But the only way to start is to sit across from the table with people who aren’t like us and talk with them, not to them.
Conversation begins with listening. Not contradicting. Not defending your position. Not arguing. Listening.
As we like to say at NDP and in the interviews we do in the Advance with local leaders, we want to get to know your “why behind the why.”
Yes, someone will believe in X, Y, and Z. But what brings them to that position? When we know that, the details of X, Y, and Z begin to recede into the background, and a conversation can bloom.
We need a lot more than this, and a lot less of what passes for discourse today.
We’ve traded conversation for Facebook comments — that’s not conversation.
We’ve traded thoughtful, informed debate for ideological gibberish and bumper-sticker slogans — they’re neither thoughtful nor informed.
And perhaps most importantly, we’ve traded grace and humility for data and “facts,” as if either is superior to the two traits that have guided the growth of human civilization for some six millennia.
I commented to my thought-partner Shaun Kenney several weeks ago that I’d already written my post-election-day commentary. In a nutshell, it’s this: Regardless who wins, half the country will be angry.
We have to find a better way forward.
Democracy is not easy. And it doesn’t work when people believe politics is beyond repair. Politics is at the core of who we are.
My friend Kenney is far more versed in Aristotle than I, so pardon me for turning to Britannica to summarize the truth about politics Aristotle.
[Politics], Aristotle says, is to investigate, on the basis of the constitutions collected, what makes for good government and what makes for bad government and to identify the factors favourable or unfavourable to the preservation of a constitution.
We identify those factors by talking with one another, not hurling barbs on social media.
At the end of the day, it’s up to us. We all need to demand better or ourselves.
Follow us on Facebook | Instagram | Youtube
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit our website at the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past month, our reporting was:
First to report on a Spotsylvania School teacher arrested for bringing drugs onto campus.
First to report on new facility fees leveled by MWHC on patient bills.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Provided extensive coverage of the cellphone bans that are sweeping local school districts.
And so much more, like Clay Jones, Drew Gallagher, Hank Silverberg, and more.
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
That's all good and fine. To an extent. But only to an extent.
Where does it state that you have to keep talking until you reach consensus? That there's no principle or belief that you won't negotiate or deny for the purpose of comity?
I would posit that the idea that people today are really worse than people 30 ears ago, 100 years ago, whatever - is a false one. They're just people. And not all of them are acting in good faith. What then?
It is not wrong to state the truth.
Just yesterday, in the aftermath of the attempted assassination of Trump (as current facts indicate occurred), Republicans immediately went on the offensive to claim the problem is that Democrats are pointing out how unfit Trump is, not that he is unfit. Stating facts cannot be the problem.
Using violence to resolve a political question? Yes, that is wrong as long as there are other ways to resolve it. On that we are in agreement.
But the solution cannot be that we avoid hard truths for the sake of conversation and so we can "talk to one another".
The other day, part of the Republican cult met with leaders of Nato and told them not to take Trump literally, but to take him seriously.
Again, the solution is that everyone else in a discussion is supposed to take one party seriously, but not literally?
You don't think that's the problem?
If you cannot be allowed to judge a person by their words or actions, what exactly are you allowed to use?
Their television ratings?
You have a 30 time convicted felon who has been found guilty of sexual assault, and fraud - who has other felony charges pending - yet somehow - we've now learned from the Republican majority that was placed on the Supreme Court, that we are not electing a President, but rather - an Emperor, whose actions - no matter how erratic or self serving- is above approach - with absolute immunity as long as he can tenuously claim he is doing it for the country. When did we agree with that?
But as long as folks like Mr Kenney, local Republicans like Youngkin, Wittman, etc. all look the other way, and as long as folks such as yourselves are unwilling to draw a line in the sand and say "enough" - as you have found no principle of governance you will not overlook for the sake of "conversation" this will not only continue, but worsen. Conversation without honesty is not only disingenuous, it is harmful.
If there is a principle that you hold so dear that you will not forsake it in the name of "comity" you've hidden it very well.
I have no doubt you mean well. Talk without principle or point beyond just talking to say you did, cannot be the solution. There's got to be something you believe in beyond that.