Monday, March 1, 2021

THE "NEW CIVILITY" -- WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT ISN’T

By Edwin Cooney


Okay, I'll start this out with a disclaimer. There's nothing new about “civility” even in Washington, D.C. However, its absence over the last four years makes what civility there once was in Washington seem new as fresh new sprouts of political civility appear from under the weeds of political incivility in the rich D.C. political garden soil. Civility ultimately takes many forms but the aspect of the New Civility I’ll address here is political civility.


Political civility is not so much about ideological policy as it is about plain good manners and a willingness to be tolerant of what everyone brings to the table. Political civility is letting everyone come to the table to strive to find ways to allow everyone to believe that they have brought something valuable to the discussion and the resolution of a public issue. In short, political civility is meaningful political inclusion.


What the New Civility is not is the surrendering of all or even a major part of one's political principles. Conservatives ought to continue to rely on constitutional strict construction just as liberals continue to stress constitutional elasticity or broad construction and, hence, a living Constitution versus a mere authoritarian and quotable reference book. The trick is the task of defining the difference between principle and responsible practicality. The abortion issue is a perfect example of the possible being obstructed by the political. Most people believe that, at best, abortions ought to be avoided. Second, most realize that most of the anti-abortion sentiment in this country depends on manipulating emotions regarding the deaths of unborn babies which pro-choice advocates refer to as merely fetuses. Third, to ban abortions in any state doesn't prevent those who can afford it to go out of state to have an abortion. Therein lies the practical solution. Jerry Ford was right in 1976 when he asserted that abortions ought to be a state issue, not a national one. The solution to this controversy has nothing to do with either morals or logic. The problem is the vitriol with which the debate is conducted. Catch phrases like "baby vs. fetus,” “murder vs. medical procedure,” “pro-choice vs. pro-life” are all designed to inflame rather than to resolve this important public issue. 


Furthermore, political civility, in order to work, must not deny the obvious and essential input of either science or technology. People can't live in the ideal. As FDR's late great practitioner Harry Hopkins once told a United States Senator who suggested that the nation's food supply problem could be fixed over time: “People don’t eat in the long run, Senator, they eat every day.”


As both a student of history and a citizen with a good memory, I can remember when a president welcomed a Senate Minority leader to the White House for countless after work cocktails despite deep political differences. I'm referring to the relationship between President Lyndon Baines Johnson and Illinois Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen. During the first two years of the Johnson administration, the “Wizard of Ooze” both supported and opposed LBJ. In 1964, he played  a crucial role in the passing of the 1964 Civil Rights bill. The following year he vigorously opposed LBJ's Medicare proposal calling it "a fraud and a political hoax."


Political civility has three deadly enemies which are both lawful and constitutional. One enemy is the powerful right wing media supported by the ending of the old Fairness Doctrine. Second is the uninhibited influence of money which too often speaks louder than personal friendship and influence when it comes to solvable national issues such as abortion, civil rights and and the task of controlling the damage brought about by climate change. The third enemy is the stultifying of insistent partisanship. Remember, the antiabortion movement began in the Democratic Party with the 1976 presidential candidacy of Ellen McCormick. It was taken up by the GOP despite the fact that GOP members of the Supreme Court had helped make Roe vs. Wade constitutional in 1973. No political party or ideology possesses a permanent hold on either right or morality!  


Back in the days of Camelot (which many insist never really existed), Jack Kennedy occasionally met with Dwight Eisenhower, and Richard Nixon and was personally friendly with Barry Goldwater. While meeting in person with Democrats who felt pressured to vote against the Kennedy Administration's Medicare and tax cut proposals, he often would assure them that he understood and was sympathetic with their political dilemmas.


It may ultimately be too much to expect President Biden, who is only faintly a “Jack Kennedy,” to be strong enough to usher in a new political era of civility, but there are signs that it could actually happen. My personal optimism throughout 2020 was strengthened by my belief that most Americans were emotionally and politically exhausted by the continuous angry negativity of President Trump and the GOP. Political anger and negativity which is dependent on a high level of outrage (something ultimately impossible to sustain) inevitably exhausts most of us. Its opposite, ill-considered optimism, often wears out a political constituency. In 1949, Secretary of State Dean Acheson didn't include Korea when he outlined the Asian nations that were under our defense security blanket in the Western Pacific. That omission played havoc with the Truman administration's authority during the Korean conflict after South Korea was invaded by Communist North Korea on Sunday, June 25,1950. On the other hand, the Trumpian claim in late 2019 that we were about to be invaded from Central America by a treasonous hoard of immigrants did little to resolve the issue of immigration, especially during an upcoming election year.      


The New Civility by no means advocates pushing volatile public issues under the proverbial rug. Perhaps the greatest enemy of civility in political discussion is the profitability of rebel-rousing writing, speech, and, especially, broadcasting.


Some, of course, will suggest that this idea is "Big Brotherish” as it certainly cannot be legally legislated from Washington. However, it may well be that we will ultimately smother democracy, freedom, or liberty in the blanket of our own cloud of worry, anxiety and despair!


At present, the New Civility is just an idea. I hope you will make it a cause!


RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,


EDWIN COONEY

No comments: