I’m grateful for the continued opportunity to extemporize in what was, until his recent passing, my husband’s space in this newspaper. I promise not to harp on the idea that everybody should just be nice—although there are much worse subjects to get hung up on. But I’d like to take one more crack at moving collective thought toward a more peaceful planet.
Our culture has many distinct hot topics that divide the populous into us and them — race, gender, sexual identity, immigration, and the Second Amendment to name a few. People are often adamant that their view is the “correct” view. I know, because I have been correct in my thinking most of my life! (Imagine smiley emoji.) But as I’ve gotten older, I’ve become less rigid about my points of view—not because my thinking is muddled or that I am unsure about my stance, only that I finally recognize that we can’t all be right. Or can we?
Imagine if each of us, when feeling hostility from or toward “the other side,” would take a step back and allow for just a hint of credibility to what our opponent is saying. We don’t have to admit it out loud or put it in print or even come to believe it—just consider that our hostile adversary might have an actual reason for a particular point of view, whether or not we regard that reason as reasonable. Just give a little around the edges. Don’t compromise your heartfelt beliefs but pause to consider the possibility that someone can have a distinctly different outlook without being totally insane or utterly misinformed. That would constitute the beginning of “being nice.” A tiny step toward giving the benefit of the doubt rather than doubling down on our own particular rhetoric in the heat of passion.
My representative to the United States Congress (who, here, shall remain nameless to curb the perception of vitriol) sends me regular updates on what he is doing in Washington. Since the election, these messages all contain paragraphs of animosity toward the current president and his political party and place the lack of prescribed “unity” squarely at their feet.
He sounds so angry! He condemns every move they make! And that’s his right, I suppose. It is the adherence to heartfelt beliefs and principles, and the public presentation of those ideals, that keeps a democracy functioning. But what if he could soften just enough to consider that there might be some tiny bit of rational thought going on across the aisle? Might this not salve rather than salt the wounds that threaten the well-being of our peaceful republic?
Now please don’t think I’m taking aim exclusively at my representative or his political party. I have heard some mighty contemptuous remarks from the other party as well: A freshly elected representative publicly shouting “Impeach the M…F…” comes to mind. It seemed inappropriate to me at the time, and still does—regardless of anyone’s political alignment.
If we are all presuming our ideas are correct, maybe that’s because there isn’t any absolute right or wrong, only profound differences of opinion. So, the next time you find yourself in an argument with someone—whether a public figure, your neighbor, or your spouse—try pressing the pause button on your anger generator and consider the proposal of a genuine agreement to respectfully disagree. You might find it’s true that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
Cara Sroges