Great conversation with Ken Burns here about civility...

1 reply [Last post]
MMM's picture
MMM
Offline
Joined: 08/19/09 11:28AM

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/2011/apr/05/civil-war-civility/
http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/

Some intersting parallels between prohibition and many current hot button issues, how they can become politicized and influence parties. Also I love this discussion about civility and the general lack of it amongst political debate these day. Also the importance of history. Great stuff.

"Here to do great things."

Bee K's picture
Bee K
Offline
Joined: 07/30/10 10:54AM
Partake of a John Thomas, my good sir!

Richard Hofstadter has a section in his Anti-Intellectualism book where he talks about the solidarity that existed among our political leaders when the Declaration and Constitution were being written, and then how by the late 1700s, once independence from Europe had been established, everything pretty much fell apart. The same generation of political leaders that wrote those documents were at each others throats over the Alien and Sedition Acts. There really hasn't been a moment of solidarity like the decade following 1776 and there probably won't ever be again in this country (barring an imminent threat from an astroid or clear-cut environment calamity?). The point being: the lack of civility amongst political debaters is definitely something to address, but the idea itself is like everything else: trite in the face of history. Even centuries back in a time that some of us associate with ladies, gentlemen and Victorian (?) manners, people were slinging mud in their own way. We go through eras where civility waxes and wanes (and Ken Burn mentions as much in this discussion). And ironically, Democrats and Republicans can viciously argue (or civilly discuss) a particular issue while both sides are hopelessly chained to corrupt banks and continue to bomb the crap out of the Middle East. So really, what exactly does civility entail in that context?

As a footnote, in Catton's account of the Army of the Potomac (and in other Civil War books as well), he talks about well-documented instances of fraternization between the Union and Confederate armies. There were lulls in combat where soldiers would often sneak out to trade supplies, tobacco, and play cards. In one particular battle where the lines were pretty close to each other, two opposing soldiers got into a shouting match so vulgar and harsh that both sides called a cease-fire so that everyone could gather in the battlefield and let these two duke it out. After they had beaten the crap out of each other, there wasn't enough light left to fight so the two sides just traded supplies and called it a day. This is how insane that war was (any war, really).