I was at a public information meeting a few weeks ago where I overheard someone saying, in very emphatic, accusatory terms, that because the mayor lives in Brackendale, she is opposing all the developments in that neighbourhood and supporting projects elsewhere including the development that was the subject of the public meeting. This was surprising for a number of reasons, not least of which is I don’t actually live in Brackendale.
This person, of course, did not know I was standing behind them, so I politely introduced myself and clarified that I did not live in Brackendale, but I was happy to listen to their concerns.
The fact that the truth did not help their narrative was obviously frustrating to them and therefore did not inspire any sort of mea culpa, but it did highlight for me an erosion of public discourse where we accuse opponents of self-serving motives to underscore or rationalize our own perspective. Our “unyielding one-sidedness” has created public discourse that engenders distrust and further polarizes perspectives. And this distrust is not one-sided; I too am susceptible to dismissing someone’s concerns because they seemed to be conflating fact and fiction, and I must be mindful of this possibility.
I use this as an example not to criticize this individual, but to highlight, as James Hoggan explores in his book I’m Right, and You’re an Idiot, the toxic state of public discourse. Making factually incorrect statements or spreading innuendo not only unfurls misinformation and distrust but it also makes it easy to dismiss valid criticism. Hoggan goes on to talk about how this combative style of public debate, when extremes and misinformation define issues, is not only polarizing but leaves little room for middle-ground dialogue, consensus or any deliberative debate whatsoever.
Hoggan spoke about his findings in I’m Right at a conference I attended last week. He challenged the elected officials in the room to “disagree more constructively” so that we can collectively address the dysfunction of today’s public discourse. Don’t give credibility to the “us versus them” narrative that then becomes about the fight and not about the issue.
This seductive and validating “circle of blame” is constant in today’s political arena, certainly globally (particularly in the era of Trump), nationally and provincially, but also locally. To counter this pervasiveness, we must listen more deeply, practice empathy and embrace cognitive dissonance in ourselves… easier said than done, I know.
As I bought Hoggan’s book after the keynote, he scrawled helpful words of wisdom on the title page from author, peace activist and Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh: Speak the truth but not to punish.
