Hawthorn Hill: Compromise is not a bad thing

Columns

Discussion

COMMENTING ON STORIES:

Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.

Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.

Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.

RULES OF CONDUCT:

We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:

1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.

WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:

1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:

1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.

WE WELCOME:

1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.

MONITORING:

We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time will be sporadic.

comments powered by Disqus

September 17, 2009

Hawthorn Hill: Compromise is not a bad thing

Anonymous The Cooperstown Crier Thu Sep 17, 2009, 11:02 AM EDT

Much as I crave and seek solitude, complete withdrawal is neither possible nor particularly useful in a shrinking world. Having been raised to value community and the work required to maintain healthy and viable communities, recent behavioral trends in this country have conspired to undermine my faith in its ability, and willingness, to do what is necessary to bring about its salvation.

The Federalist papers issued the strongest warning to date about the dangers of factionalism. Perhaps every one of us ought to go back and read those papers to remind ourselves of what is best about this country — and about the pitfalls that loom large if any democracy is not wary of its inherent danger points. It might also be a good idea to review relevant sections of deTocqueville’s Democracy in America, perhaps the most insightful study of America ever written.

The vitriol that seems to characterize political discourse in this country has achieved levels of incivility and anger that I for one would never have imagined possible in my lifetime. I was fortunate to have been raised to value difference, to understand that dissent is an essential element in any successful democracy, and that protecting one’s views from challenge is both unhealthy and rather cowardly. When I do have a discussion with someone whose views differ from mine I enjoy the give and take. And what I most value is the extent to which an opposing perspective makes me look even more deeply and analytically into my own. I try to play what Aristotle described as ``the believing game.’’ It is a tough game to play, but it is worth the effort.

The recent outburst during the President’s address to Congress on health care is an unfortunate example of the sad state of discourse in America. The notion that an individual who sees things differently is a liar is as reprehensible as it is counterproductive. No wonder so many of our really fine legislators started leaving Washington years ago.

As former Republican Senator Alan Simpson said when interviewed several years ago, it used to be that political opponents would debate on the Senate floor by day and have dinner together at night. Or even spend family weekends together.

Sadly, that does not happen much anymore. A more local example is a conservative columnist whose word choices to describe the opposition are both offensive and certainly not conducive to the kind of dialogue that should characterize debate in a great democracy.

In the last several days I have heard friends lament the impossibility of having civil political discussions with close friends over dinner because of an intransigence so deeply embedded as to preclude civil debate of any kind. I experienced the same thing several years ago over lunch with my brother, whose commitment to conservatism ran so deep and was so personally felt, that discussion at any level was impossible. It was not a pleasant lunch, which was unfortunate, since we only got to see one another infrequently. The irony of it all was, and still is, that despite our political differences, we had a lot in common. And that is true of all of us.

Compromise is not a bad thing. I see things one way. Someone else sees things differently. This penchant for name calling and offensive behavior will get us nowhere.

If it continues, who knows, Edward Gibbon, author of The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, might come back from the dead and write another history of a country whose downfall was caused primarily by internal rot.