Public Discourse – Communication

Happy New Year! I have been trying to do this blog on a regular basis and have failed miserably. So, I have made a resolution to do a blog a month (my actual goal is every other week, but I didn’t want to set too high a mark to begin with😊!).

Like it or not, 2019 marks a year where we will be overwhelmed with people sharing their opinions, ideas, and righteous indignation as we head into another presidential election, have a divided congress, and – at least for the United Methodist Church – make some far reaching decisions about who we are and what we believe. I thought that I would begin 2019 then with some thoughts on communication, and what is known as “public discourse.”

At several points in this blog I will quote from this article: The Current State Of Public Discourse By Kovie Biakolo, April 20th 2013 found on the website: https://thoughtcatalog.com/kovie-biakolo/2013/04/the-current-state-of-public-discourse/ . So wherever italicized text appears it is a quote from here.

In order to begin this blog, I need to define what I mean by public discourse. The term public discourse [refers] to communicated issues of public culture that affect individuals and groups in a given civilization. Most of our public discourse is constructed in the environment of the nation-state as that is largely the context in which public discourse takes place…public discourse is communication and at its heart communication is an accompanied experience that involves initiated expression as well as response.

Communication; talk with one another not at or to one another. Communication, sharing in a dialogue where both parties speak AND listen. Communication, a thoughtful expressing of what one person thinks, believes, etc. and a willingness to listen to what the other has to offer of their own thoughts, beliefs, etc. Communication isn’t a dogged holding on to one’s thoughts and beliefs in a dogmatic or self-righteous way. It is a sharing where both parties come to hear what the other has to say and the reasons they have for saying what they say and a discussion of those reasons. The goal is to connect with one another, to understand each other better and to allow yourself to consider a different perspective or viewpoint.

I am not naive enough to believe that everyone comes to a discussion on equal footing. Nor do I think that we all can totally step outside our biases or the circumstances that influence and inform us. The public culture is affected by a multiplicity of factors – politics, religion, ideology, economic philosophies, and individuals and groups’ conception of attitudes towards what is and what should be the values of people living in a nation-state. When we participate in communicating any of the above mentioned criteria, we are participating in public discourse. Given that some voices are more powerful than others, people do not participate in the public discourse equally or identically. Nonetheless, the state of public discourse in the United States is one that in the ideal, gives people the freedom to voice opinions, support, and grievances openly and without fear.

I crave public discourse. I want to know why someone believes differently from me. I want to know what reasons lay behind the values and beliefs they hold. I want to have another share with me their deep convictions. What I don’t want is for the other to come at me with an argument for why their way of seeing things is the only way to see things. It used to be that those on the more conservative end of the spectrum tended to be less interested in public discourse and more interested in telling others why their beliefs and values were wrong. But over the last few years both ends of the spectrum have become guilty of forgoing public discourse for self-righteousness. What we need is for both ends to recognize that the way forward isn’t one way or the other it is a way found through communication and public discourse.

Not everything can or should be defined by what any one group or individual thinks is the “right” way of living. We are a pluralistic society where we value individuals and their rights to freedom of belief and expression and we cannot focus in on a narrow understanding of what is right or good. Sure, there must be some basic understandings of what is right and good, but one group or belief system cannot dominate at the expense of another when we are talking about the society at large.

It can and maybe should be different when you get into sub-groups of the society, like a particular faith and its values and beliefs. The United Methodist Church has reached a point where – because of basic differences in how to understand God, the Bible, and living faithfully – we cannot continue as we are. There are possible ways to stay together and allow for different ways of believing but I am not too optimistic that these ways will win out in the end. It is my hope that we can find a way to communicate with one another, to hold public discourse so that the way forward is one that isn’t defined by one group or way of believing but is a path that truly considers what all think and feel. A decision will be made, and it will cause some to leave but it doesn’t have to split us if we can find a way to understand one another.

I really hope that 2019 can be defined as the year of public discourse where we finally communicate with one another and practice the art of compromise and consensus. That is my prayer for this new year.