Civility and name calling

Froma Harrop

Providence Journal columnist Froma Harrop is also nationally syndicated. She has an interesting column in today's ProJo titled "The Op-Ed Pages Are No Tea Party."

She begins by describing the attacks she received from Tea Partiers and their supporters for a column she wrote comparing the Tea Party's willingness to trash the economy, shred the country's credit rating and hold the nation hostage until its demands are met - to the acts of terrorists. And the national economy and markets are still reeling from the Tea Party's stunt.



That was not an unusual point of view - that holding the country's economy hostage was an act of terrorism. I wrote essentially the same things, as did many others. And drew the same sort of feigned outrage from right-wingers.

I didn't apologize. Don't plan to. And I have read very few places where writers who drew the same terrorist-Tea Party link are trying to walk the words back.

Harrop notes that civility, however valued, is not worth trading for truth. In disputes with lots on the line, sometimes you just can't make your point without hurting somebody's feelings. Too bad.

H.L.Mencken

The essential difference is whether there is a factual basis, a logical underpinning for whatever uncivil language you may use. Harrop notes that "Name calling is not foreign to respectable commentary. " She cites famed early 20th Century conservative political H.L. Mencken as a prime example.

She cites a Baltimore Sun 1925 essay where "Mencken referred to the followers of populist William Jennings Bryan as “half-wits,” “gaping primates,” “rustic ignoramuses” and a “forlorn mob of imbeciles.” Yet despite Mencken's unflinching attacks on those he felt were ignorant and wrong, he was nonetheless one of America's most respected political commentators. He used harsh words, but he based up what he said with fact.

Harrop defines incivility as "nonfactual and uninformed opinions hidden in anonymity or false identities," And "vitriol without a smart argument is a bore. It’s not the vitriol alone that makes people most angry. It’s a strong argument that hits the bull’s-eye."

In Charlestown politics, you rarely hear people say what they really mean (except if they're Jim Mageau). In the name of pseudo-civility, we are supposed to pretend that everyone's intentions are good, each person's argument - however ridiculous - has merit and that all persons in the political arena deserve equal respect. We are supposed to hide behind our masks and speak in low tones. No cursing, no spitting, no loud tones or pointed arguments.

In case you haven't noticed, that's not how we do it at Progressive Charlestown.

Author: Will Collette