As I mentioned before, I am not a big fan of New Year’s resolutions. It seems silly to plan major changes or make big commitments based on the arbitrary turn of a calendar page. If you weren’t already committed to doing something new or stopping something old, why should the change of the last two numbers on the date make any difference? And my skepticism comes supported by the long line of “how I failed at my New Year’s resolutions” journalism.
Here’s another take on the concept: a challenge for everyone. If you like it, please share it with your friends.
David Brooks, the New York Times columnist, often comments on the lack of civility in our public discourse. He recently had a column with the title “Trump has made us all stupid.” Before my conservative friends go apoplectic: yes, he did (as always) criticize the President, but the point of his commentary was to criticize the President’s critics, who now seem to believe that they can say any wrong, ridiculous, or vulgar thing they want, because . . . President Trump.
I usually blog about once a year on being more civil, because I believe with all my soul that–first–civility is lacking, and–second–there is no excuse for lacking civility. No “but-racist” excuse, no “but-illegal” excuse, no “but-Nazi” excuse, no “but-hater” excuse. Have ever seen a police officer calmy apprehending a crazed drunk, who is spitting and swearing and swinging with abandon, while the officer gets the hands-behind-the-back-and-into-cuffs and puts the offender into the back seat of the patrol car? It’s exponentially more common than the videos of police brutality, and it is a portrait of civility in the most extreme case.
Unfortunately, many folks don’t recognize their incivility. It happens on social media, or in a crowd, and they feel anonymous or empowered, or just sooooo right, but hardly uncivil. Pleas for greater civility fall on deaf ears, because surely you don’t mean me?
Here’s the challenge: identify your social medium of choice, the one where you spend the most time. Pull up your active history: not what you read, but just what you post/share/comment/tweet. Review the last hundred or so entries (or the last year if less than one hundred). Now consider:
- If the exercise took you more than fifteen minutes, you have too much material on social media. It’s not real, people. Spend more time with the real people in your life, and less with fake internet friends.
- If many of your entries are on a single topic (hmmmm, let’s say “Trump”) you are dangerously close to being “that guy.” You know, the tedious bore who brings every discussion ’round to their obsession. Don’t be him, even on social media.
- Use vulgarity much, even in abbreviations, leetspeak, or symbol shorthand (i.e., sh*t)? Lovely, it so strengthens your argument that the other side is, well, vulgar, right?
- In one hundred entries, ever admit to an error or make a correction? You mean in all those posts, you hit for 100% accuracy? Wow!
- How often did you concede a point to an opponent, or yield to an argument? Most of the time, both sides have some good points; did you miss them? Why? If you NEVER ran into a superior argument from the opposing side: you need some new friends, as you’re comfortably inside your echo chamber.
I did this challenge for myself. What did I learn?
I have an unhealthy obsession with Notre Dame football, and if you want to goad me into a nasty comment, just tell me (1) it’s all good, (2) I have unrealistic expectations, or (3) it isn’t 1988 anymore. Grrrrrrrr. I will work on that, right after they dump their (adjective deleted) coach.
I can ignore exaggerations, political spin, or even incredulous comments if they have no significance. I find it hard to let blatant errors or outright falsehoods go if they are used to inflame other’s opinions. These offend my sense of righteousness, so I spend some serious time correcting the internet, which is futile if momentarily satisfying.
I post and respond a little too often on political topics, but thirty years in DC will give one some insight and a little too much interest in the political realm.
I have about equal numbers of conservative and liberal/progressive “friends,” so I see a fair number of extreme views from both sides, although my friends à gauche are far more inflamed and likely to post something extreme. I would bet the opposite would have been true in the last administration, but that was before I joined social media.
I have had to correct myself a few times, generally when I respond too quickly without doing the necessary research, a lesson always worth remembering. No profanity, although I know there were a few in the first draft of my comments!
I generally spend about 30 minutes in the morning and another 30 minutes before dinner on social media. That means I miss a lot depending on the site’s algorithms; I recently almost missed a friend’s gofundme campaign for health care because my “feed” didn’t feed me! I spend about an equal amount of time (one hour) researching topics, because (1) I’m skeptical of most things I see posted, (2) I’m curious about the why-things-happen more than the what-happened, and (3) there is so much good information out there, if you look.
General lessons learned:
- More reading (as in researching), less posting.
- Stay gentle, even with the harshest comments.
- People of goodwill can disagree on just about anything, but that doesn’t make one side evil.
- The other side doesn’t know they wear the black hats.
- If you’re going to rant, post RANT COMING before and END OF RANT, PLEASE DISREGARD after. Allies may enjoy your catharsis, and your opponents will know not to take it seriously
- Civility is a virtuous cycle; the more you produce,the more others will produce. Incivility is a vicious cycle; your hate spurs even more hate. There are no exceptions!