Sem 2 Wk 12 Xavier Boffa As law students – future lawyers, advocates and lawmakers – we should be more concerned about the state of our public discourse. We should strive to be more decent, more courteous and more understanding. We should desire to lead by example by resisting the temptation to conform to the standards around us. The reasons we should aspire to a greater level of civility speak for themselves. Aside from strong moral arguments in support of respect and toleration, there are many practical benefits to be gained. The reasons we should aspire to a greater level of civility speak for themselves. Aside from strong moral arguments in support of respect and toleration, there are many practical benefits to be gained.
Since the horrific 2017 Congressional baseball shooting, the trend has only worsened. Who would want to contribute to public life when our political discourse has devolved to the point some feel disagreements run so deep they cannot be resolved without violence (such as the recent assault of Victorian MP David Southwick) and abuse? Who would want to be a public figure when you can’t even enjoy a precious moment with your spouse without being harassed, like Ted and Heidi Cruz, for holding different views? We now live in a world in which the politics of hatred, envy and personal destruction seem to be overpowering reason, compassion and civility. Today, it appears that people are too ready to attack one another rather than engage with principles and ideas. Worse still is the way that public figures’ families on all sides are vilified for political purposes. Nothing I can say on this point could be more powerful than the following contribution from former first daughter Chelsea Clinton in response to a cartoon featuring Brett Kavanaugh’s daughter: “If you can’t make your point about Judge Kavanaugh, whatever it may be, without bullying his kids, it’s not worth making.” Chelsea Clinton has no doubt experienced what Liza and Margaret Kavanaugh are experiencing, but we don’t have to have experienced hurt to know that its cause is wrong. We don’t have to be parents to be appalled by the threats against Kora Hanson-Young. But too often, we get too caught up in impassioned debates to see the personal toll these disagreements can exact from others. No victory or success, political or otherwise, is worth sacrificing one’s integrity and humanity. By this I mean, not only the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles, but also of being true to one’s own self. The advice and consent process associated with the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court highlights everything we stand to lose if things do not change. For me, one particularly jarring incident involved a group of organised protestors being led around Congress as they chanted and screamed abuse at Senators and congressional staff. As they were directed to stage sit-in of a wavering Democratic Senator’s office during a key vote, one woman can be heard asking: “Why? She’s on our side.” She was right to wonder about this use of political pressure. The idea that we should demand strict adherence from our ‘allies’ speaks to a toxic win-at-all-costs mentality that has pervaded Western politics. This dangerous notion encourages people to be hardest on those with whom they have most in common, and validates the politics of thuggery and intimidation. The root of this malaise is a brand of tribalism that forces people to choose ‘sides’ rather than empowering them to become politically engaged individuals. The result is a politics ruled not by conscience, but by a need to ‘beat’ the other team. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton warned against the destructive role of factions over 200 years ago in The Federalist Papers. We must heed their warning. So, what can we do about it? Firstly, we can heed Justice Elena Kagan’s advice to give others the benefit of the doubt. As any case involving the construction of an instrument will reveal, words often can be interpreted in multiple different ways. Whenever we interact with each other we can choose to promote understanding. We can remember that, in the immortal words of Jessie J, ‘nobody’s perfect’ and we can look for the good in others. Secondly, we can learn from Justice Clarence Thomas’ wisdom by choosing to look beyond outcomes. We can instead focus on what Justice Stephen Beyer describes as listening better to better understand our common goals. Thirdly, we can draw inspiration from the close friendship of the fervently ideologically opposed Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. We should remember that, no matter how vehemently we disagree with one another, we all share a common humanity. We will never live in a world in which all people agree about all things. We can, however, build a world in which peoples’ disagreements are civil and do not define their interactions with one another. I can’t but think of some of the comments in response to recent De Minimis articles (1, 2) about the LSS ‘People of Colour Lunch’. We can and should do better; not only in politics, but also in how we conduct ourselves throughout the course of everyday life. We (myself included) can be more generous, more civil and more compassionate. At a leading law school, we can lead by example.
SL
16/10/2018 08:12:25 pm
From memory, Heydon J lost on this point in Coleman v Power.
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:17:33 am
I actually identify more with Callinan's reasons in Coleman, but you're correct: both he and Heydon wrote in dissent. I do, however, agree with Heydon that: "[i]nsulting statements give rise to a risk of acrimony leading to breaches of the peace, disorder and violence." When individuals use violent rhetoric, they should be live to the reality that this can give license to violent action. Repeat 'Xavier Boffa is a bad person' enough times and eventually someone might feel justified in causing me or my loved ones physical harm.
Is it that easy?
16/10/2018 08:20:13 pm
I think you raise some really good points, but I also think it's easy to be civil when you're not the one on the receiving end of systemic oppression and abuse. To have to deal with sexism or racism every day of your life wears you down, and at some point it isn't about some higher principle or ideology - it is your life. Maybe think about why people aren't civil - did anyone listen when they were?
Whatever
16/10/2018 09:14:35 pm
Who are you kidding? You went on The Bolt Report to spread an inflammatory message about life being unbearable as a conservative in a liberal university. You had no qualms about defaming your own university. And now here you are preaching civility. Practice what you preach.
SM
16/10/2018 09:44:31 pm
Nothing about it was inflammatory or uncivil ? He was merely expressing an opinion about what happened? I'd say your comment amounting it to defamation is inflammatory... and the very kind of hyperbolic talk this article is talking about in debates..
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:19:23 am
Hi 'Whatever', you may not have watched the full interview, but I was actually asked to appear on The Bolt Report to discuss an article which joked about killing 'Liberal' students at the University of Melbourne. I think it's entirely consistent for me to write about why we should deplore hate speech and incitement, and for me to have condemned that article.
JS
17/10/2018 11:04:26 am
I don't agree with Boffa's worldview in the slightest, but how was his statement on the Bolt Report in any way defamatory?
Max
16/10/2018 09:26:23 pm
Great read, Xavier!
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:18:12 am
Thanks Max!
This article reeks of ignorance and privilege on so many levels.
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:20:57 am
I was exonerated by the University, the Courts and the Police, so I don't know what more you want from me. People do occasionally make false allegations for political purposes. I don't expect you to believe me. I, however, happen to agree with Justice Kagan that we can and should choose to give others the benefit of the doubt. I also happen to agree with Blackstone's Ratio. I've tried to do a positive thing by writing about tolerance and compassion. I've tried to practice what I preach by engaging constructively with commenters on articles I've written. I can't control how you choose to read what I write.
States' Rights?
16/10/2018 09:55:15 pm
I may not disagree with your overarching point, but I certainly do have qualms with how you have presented it.
hear hear
16/10/2018 11:47:36 pm
Could not agree more.
People
17/10/2018 12:14:46 am
'who has been credibly accused of sexual assault, but then in the same breath chant 'lock her up' in reference to someone who has not been convicted or accused of any crimes'
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:23:25 am
Hi 'States rights?', this is very valuable and comprehensive feedback, so thank you for taking the time to write (even anonymously). I wanted to respond to give you more insight into my writing process - not necessarily to disagree with you (so please take the below in that spirit!).
Pauline
16/10/2018 10:23:02 pm
ITS OKAY TO BE WHITE
yeah
17/10/2018 08:42:41 am
And orange. It's okay to be orange.
Lucas
16/10/2018 11:45:33 pm
You seem to assume that, in the halcyon days of yesterday's politics, the political arena was something other than a blood-ring dependent on character (and other kinds of) assassination for its continued day-to-day existence.
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:37:30 am
Hi Lucas, thank you for taking the time to so comprehensively.
dear oh dear
17/10/2018 05:51:47 am
The cherry-picked examples are awful!
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:29:12 am
'Dear oh dear' you might be interested to my reply to 'States' rights?' above re the examples used. I don't think I set out to criticise one side of politics with this article and I would encourage you to read it again without reading too much into the choice of evidence (see above response).
choose the right examples
17/10/2018 08:20:55 am
Who chose the picture accompanying the article? Was it Xavier? Way to go for a subliminal message. Trump is the one person who does not understand the concept of civil discourse. Perhaps one might be served well to be reminded of the time he mocked a journalist with disability. Or that other time he mocked Dr Ford - that too after first calling her a credible witness. Judging by Trump's standards 'Fuck Trump' is less an insult and more just wishful thinking.
Xavier Boffa
17/10/2018 09:26:35 am
You'd have to ask the DM editorial staff, because that was a staff decision. I contributed the words only. I don't disagree with you.
Lawrence Bradford
17/10/2018 09:16:21 am
Boffa Deez aha
Fortune favours the bold
17/10/2018 12:15:16 pm
Arguments yearning for civility inherently benefit the status quo - history is strewn with examples of people whose causes achieved nothing until they got radical and uncivil (ACTUP and Stonewall; the US civil rights movement and anti-apartheid campaigns; suffragettes like Emily Davison). If people keep to their station and meekly request some improvement to their lot, the powerful have no incentive to change a thing. As you've recognised in the comments Xavier, civil discourse is a privilege that some cannot afford. It is also consistently invoked to justify and enable the rising far-right. I think your article has disregarded the fact that notions of civil discourse are beneficial to some and detrimental to others.
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 11:20:56 am
Hi 'Fortune',
Fortune
2/11/2018 11:46:30 am
Sorry if I misinterpret you (I read over that third paragraph about six times in the hope I won't) but were you suggesting that it is in the interests of the centre left to encourage the far left to engage in this notion of civility because the alternative is that the far right don't engage in civility (and the historically shown extension of that)?
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 12:36:27 pm
No need to apologise! It may be unclear because you're searching for meaning that isn't there?
Fortune
2/11/2018 01:28:07 pm
Okay. Thanks for your response. We'll never agree, so I'm gonna focus on consti
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 01:42:51 pm
Fair enough and you're welcome! In any event, I think total agreement between any two people is incredibly rare and not inherently all that desirable - understanding is far more important. Thanks for commenting and good luck with Consti!
credit where credit's due
17/10/2018 06:56:05 pm
Xavier!
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 01:06:52 pm
Thank you for the incredible generosity of this comment and for taking the time to seek better to understand where I am coming from!
Scott
19/10/2018 12:20:27 am
I sense the good intentions of this article, but I fear there is a deeper and inescapable contradiction at the heart of this civility prescription.
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 12:06:10 pm
Scott, thank you for taking the time to write - I broadly agree with much of the content of you reply, but my view perhaps differs on how we define incivility.
Callinan’s White Industries
19/10/2018 10:53:43 am
Hey Xavier,
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 12:20:43 pm
Human beings are hard-wired to utilise bias as a tool to more efficiently process information - so your premise has some real weight.
Proudly Anonymous
22/10/2018 11:45:07 am
With reference to the mention of Brett Kavanaugh in the comments of this article and of Xavier’s previous article ‘Feeling Inferior’, I urge people to watch John Oliver’s interview with Anita Hill:
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 12:13:33 pm
Thanks for sharing that interview!
Xavier Boffa
2/11/2018 12:44:44 pm
Also, I should point out, I'm sorry to have disappointed!
ANONYMOUS
5/11/2018 09:07:38 am
Hey man!
(technologically challenged) anonymous
5/11/2018 09:09:32 am
I just realised that I should have replied to the PROUDLY ANONYMOUS thread. But, oh well! Comments are closed.
|
Archives
October 2022
|