Incivility, Anger, New Media and Contemporary Politics

One of the consistent claims that seems to unite everyone across the political spectrum is that current politics is highly partisan and increasingly uncivil. The conservative National Review has published numerous articles on the “ugly theater” and on how American politics had become “contentious and angry.” The democratic socialist magazine Current Affairs has discussed “hatred” in contemporary politics. And a plethora of liberal and neoliberal pundits and outlets have generated a small industry of articles calling for “civility” and “decency” in public debate. Of course, these different outlets have varied perspectives on who or what is responsible for the decline in civility. Sadly, they usually simply blame their ideological opponents, conceding—at best—that any incivility on their own team’s part is little more than a reaction to attacks by the other. Some outlets even embrace the decline of civility—claiming that a more antagonistic politics leads to the rejection of false compromises and prevents people from papering over significant differences out of politeness.

I have mixed feelings about whether politeness in politics is to be welcomed or not. As a Canadian, I naturally find various forms of rudeness taboo and often unhelpful. Also, speaking more broadly, incivility can lead to the breakdown of conditions necessary for dialogue between different factions in a democratic society. Many liberal philosophers have argued that some form of civic friendship is necessary in a democratic state, to maintain bonds of union and unite disparate groups. Civic friendship and dialogue can also be important during transitional periods when power is transferred from one political party or movement to another, an inevitable feature of any long running representative democracy. Without these values, parties may regard their opponents as inherently illegitimate and contest their right to govern even when elected in a procedurally fair manner. On the other hand, civility in the public sphere can serve to conceal deeper social antagonisms under the veneer of politeness. This was a prominent accusation directed against well-off liberals by Civil Rights advocates: liberals claimed to be sympathetic to the plight of African Americans, but tempered their empathy with calls for restraint and moderation. These days, such a disposition in the face of stark injustice looks at best like quietism. Another plausible accusation is that calls for politeness are often directed by the well off and insulated towards those who are actually impacted by serious problems. For example, genteel and aristocratic calls for civility may distract from the reality of serious injustices about which victims are rightly angry. As Current Affairs’ Nathan Robinson puts it:


https://areomagazine.com/2019/10/10/incivility-anger-new-media-and-contemporary-politics/