Are there better ways to engage in politics? How did the United States respond to the results of the 2020 Presidential Election? In this blog post, I talk about the importance of discussing politics civilly and rationally. Engaging in politics is definitely more than putting out a yard sign.
I remember from a few weeks ago the large crowd of people that congregated in front of the Massachusetts State House. This crowd formed a few days after the 2020 election on Saturday when Joe Biden had been deemed the victor. I was walking around Boston with my friend in the morning (at that point I wasn’t even aware of Biden’s victory) and we came across the growing crowd in between the Common and the State House. I heard yelling, saw police cars, and saw signs being brandished above the many heads of people in this gathering. I must confess, neither my friend nor I wanted anything to do with this crowd. My mind, as had presumably every other American’s, had been on the election for a long time, and I couldn’t help but quickly draw a comparison. I looked at this large, loud crowd and thought of the debate watch parties that I had been attending leading up to the election. These watch parties were held by Suffolk Votes (an organization that I am a part of as a Suffolk University student which I also mentioned in my last Democratic Erosions blog post) during the Presidential televised debates. In online meetings, we would watch and discuss each debate. Many would participate during the event by commenting opinions, useful information, links to news articles, etc. Afterwards, a discussion would be held where we would each take turns commenting on the important moments in and aspects of the debate. The civil and productive nature of these events is what made me immediately contrast them in my mind with the large gathering of people in front of the State House. I simply could not relate to the desire to congregate over a political victory (or loss). Additionally, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, questions of safety and the spreading virus came into play. Surely the participants of the rally have some responsibility regarding the pandemic. Can’t go to a football game, but let’s all bunch together because our political candidate won; right.
It’s all about communication, and there is a clear difference in the quality of communication when looking at an intellectual discussion vs. looking at a mass of cheering people. Aside from intellectual discussion, voting is another important form of communication. The importance of democracy is found in the actual elections, and is another good example of positive political engagement. In the 21st century, we have the incredible privilege of the internet, social media, and instant communication. This allows for more discussions on important matters and has the potential to be used for good. Free discussion is a powerful tool, but is also a large responsibility to bear. We must not let our ability to interact with our fellow citizens freely turn sour and counterproductive. We must not succumb to populism. We cannot embrace political pandering while turning away from honest discussions. I know I, along with most others I’m sure, was not happy to see so many people denying the results of the election initially. Hopefully, though, the nation is coming around to seeing the plain truth of the election results. This experience ultimately reinforced my belief in civilized, rational discussion over partisan shouting.
Hi Tyler,
I really loved the topic of this post. I had a comment about this section:
“This allows for more discussions on important matters and has the potential to be used for good. Free discussion is a powerful tool, but is also a large responsibility to bear. We must not let our ability to interact with our fellow citizens freely turn sour and counterproductive. We must not succumb to populism. We cannot embrace political pandering while turning away from honest discussions. ”
The internet, social media, and other vastly and quickly growing forms of communication have definitely brought a ton of information to users in a very accessible form. I agree that communicating political ideas and the emotions that come with them has devolved into chaotic fighting. In many cases, social rules have created bans on political discussions where they essentially are “off-limits” in conversations with families and friends.
There are two solutions I have to this problem and I was curious if you found any of them viable in your research. The first problem, the very base of the problem, is party polarization. The growing political divide in our country has certainly not been born out of Trump alone, but has been founded in how campaigns develop winning strategies.
In order to excite your base, many politicians have found that the best way to gain strong followings is to use negative emotions and anger. You can see this in Trump rallies where he angers his base about the “evil left.” You can also see this, however, in how Bernie Sanders communicated in rallies, town-halls, and even the presidential debates.
Positive news usually goes unnoticed, and these days people are more than happy to jump on topics that blame other entities for the problems society faces today. Whether its socialism, communism, feminism, progressives, or people to young to understand what’s “going on” in our country, politicians are constantly pointing fingers and blaming the “other side” for the problems that exist for many Americans.
So I believe this is a two-step solution. First, we have to educate people in how American politics functions. Most people have no idea how campaigns, elections, vote-counting, or the legislative process works. If we start educating people early on, for example in high school, they will have a better understanding of how American political institutions work. This will almost immediately eliminate sentiments like “Bernie would bring socialism”, or “Biden will raise taxes to 70%.” No president could or would actually be able to institute those ideologies in full without the support of the House and the Senate, and even then, it would be near impossible to execute an entire system-overhaul.
Secondly, people need education in fact-checking, and fact-understanding. We need to teach people, including older generations, how to find credible sources that provide reliable information and well-explained facts. Most of the current political arguments usually occur because people bring their “own set of facts” to the conversation. In worst case scenarios, people are unable to continue the discussion when they realize their “facts” have been proven wrong. They then turn from denying that they were wrong, to demanding why the wrong fact is so bad, because it’s “no better than what the other side is doing.”
I agree. I particularly like your point about educating Americans about where credible sources of information can be found online. This is a very important point to stress when asking why America is so politically divided.
Furthermore, I would agree with you as well as say that the blame falls on all of us as individuals: Each of us contributes minutely to the growing political divide in small ways everyday, whether it’s the way we talk about politics, the way we talk about other people who talk about politics, the way we treat “the other side”, etc. The small human interactions that each of us encounters everyday can be targeted towards political unity or cohesion if used properly.
I really enjoyed the topic of this conversation and how it relates to democracy in America. The way in which people discuss politics contributes to how polarized a country is and this is such an easy way that improvements could be made. It is so easy for people to put up a yard sign or argue over social media, but in the end it is hurting democracy in our country. Social media has become such a large platform that people go to to express their opinions. While, as you mentioned, it is such a privilege to have this opportunity, I think it is abused to some extent. It is so easy to go to Twitter and see what is going on, but it makes people less inclined to seek out other, more reputable sources. It seems that young people make their case on Twitter, while older people go to Facebook. People are so quick to get on social media and argue with people they have never even met. This type of interaction ends up being unproductive and causing division. I am not a proponent of censorship, but I think it is important to educate people on seeking out credible sources and being more critical of the information that is put on social media. I think this will be more beneficial to the preservation of democracy than any government mandate.
I agree. The key word here is “productive”. There’s nothing productive, as you say, about arguing over Twitter with someone if both people are going to engage in, for instance, personal attacks, unfair arguments, or false information. There must be a component of civility in this kind of a serious discussion, and that is made harder to maintain when communicating online, as opposed to in-person.