Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Is Civility in Politics Possible?

silhouettes of people arguing in front of an America flag
'One side will win': The danger of zero-sum framings
Pict Rider/Getty Images

In an era of increasing political polarization, the need for civility in politics has never been greater. Engaging in constructive and respectful dialogue is essential for maintaining a healthy democracy, fostering unity, and ensuring that governments function effectively. Unfortunately, modern political discourse is often characterized by hostility, personal attacks, and a reluctance to find common ground.

President Donald Trump reminded me of this deterioration in political decorum when he sparred with Maine Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, over transgender athletes during a meeting of governors at the White House last week.


Here is the back-and-forth as reported by the Associated Press:

“Is Maine here, the governor of Maine?” he asked.

“I’m here,” she replied.

“Are you not going to comply with it?” he asked.

“I’m complying with state and federal laws,” Mills replied.

Trump responded, “We are the federal law.” He again threatened the state’s federal funding and said Maine may be a Democratic state, but its residents largely agree with him on this issue.

“We’re going to follow the law,” she said.

“You’d better comply,” Trump warned. “Otherwise, you’re not getting any federal funding.”

“We’ll see you in court,” the governor replied.

“Good, I’ll see you in court. I look forward to that. That should be a real easy one,” Trump said. “And enjoy your life after governor because I don’t think you’ll be in elected politics.”

When politicians refuse to engage in respectful discussions, it weakens public trust in government institutions and undermines the ability of leaders to address pressing societal issues.

By prioritizing respectful dialogue, cooperation, and mutual understanding, we can rebuild trust in political institutions, promote effective governance, and create a political landscape where diverse perspectives are valued. Right?

Robert B. Talisse, a W. Alton Jones Professor of Philosophy and Political Science at Vanderbilt University, wrote in a 2020 column for The Conversation that civility may be too demanding, asking too much of passionate human nature. "People are prone to see, and complain about, incivility in their political opponents while being blind to, and silent about, the same flaws in themselves and those like them. And once they spot an opponent being uncivil, they free themselves to retaliate in kind."

The Challenges and Possibilities of Civility

Civility in politics faces numerous obstacles. Hyper-partisanship has created an environment where compromise is often seen as a weakness rather than a necessary tool for governance. When politicians and citizens prioritize ideological purity over constructive dialogue, the space for civil discourse diminishes.

Dr. Christopher Lynch, a Missouri State University political science professor, said that civil conversations aim to genuinely understand another position different from ours. Lynch was interviewed about why it’s important to maintain civility in political discussions and how to achieve it following a national survey on why political-based conflict was rising ahead of the November 2024 election.

Dr. LeAnn Brazeal, associate professor of communication, added that the goal of conversations should not be to win but to understand. “Genuine listening helps us understand and see where our interests intersect,” she said.

I agree with Brazeal and Lynch that a more productive approach is to seek a deeper understanding of the complex factors that contribute to different perspectives. Doing so can help reduce polarization and foster more constructive dialogue.

The role of social media and sensationalist news outlets is another obstacle that has exacerbated political divisions. Online platforms encourage echo chambers, where individuals are exposed only to views that align with their own, reinforcing polarization. Additionally, the immediacy and anonymity of social media facilitate hostile exchanges, making productive discussions more difficult.

In Paving the path forward to strengthening democracy, I shared that in times of high conflict, it's common for people to split into two opposing groups and view each other negatively. This can lead to generalizations and name-calling, which often dehumanize the other side and escalate tensions.

The media has a significant role in fostering a culture of civility. News outlets should strive for balanced reporting and avoid sensationalism that fuels division. Journalists can contribute to civility by holding politicians accountable for inflammatory rhetoric and promoting thoughtful discussions on key issues.

As a solutions journalism practitioner, I leverage Complicating the Narratives, which helps journalists find new ways to report on controversial issues and polarizing politics. It draws on the experience of experts in conflict mediation. When reporters use these strategies, they listen better, ask more revealing questions, effectively introduce opposing viewpoints, and embrace nuance in their reports. They learn to tell more accurate, richer, and fuller stories.

Citizens, too, are responsible for engaging in respectful discussions, seeking to understand different perspectives, and rejecting the temptation to dehumanize political opponents are crucial steps toward a more civil political landscape. Social media, in particular, should be used as a space for meaningful dialogue rather than a breeding ground for hostility and misinformation.

While the current state of political discourse may suggest that civility is unattainable, I believe it remains possible if concerted efforts are made at all levels of society.

By prioritizing respectful dialogue, cooperation, and mutual understanding, we can rebuild trust in political institutions and create a political landscape where diverse perspectives are valued. Civility in politics is not just an ideal—it is a necessity for the stability and success of any democratic society. The responsibility to uphold it lies with everyone—leaders, media, and citizens alike. Only through collective effort can we bridge divides and work towards a more inclusive and functional democracy.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and a board member of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, the parent organization of The Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network and a trainer with the Solutions Journalism Network.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Political outrage is rising—but dismissing the other side’s anger deepens division. Learn why taking outrage seriously can bridge America’s partisan divide.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger

Over the last several weeks, the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital to crack down on crime. While those on the right have long been aghast by rioting and disorder in our cities, pressing for greater military intervention to curtail it, progressive residents of D.C. have tirelessly protested the recent militarization of the city.

This recent flashpoint is a microcosm of the reciprocal outrage at the heart of contemporary American public life. From social media posts to street protests to everyday conversations about "the other side," we're witnessing unprecedented levels of political outrage. And as polarization has increased, we’ve stopped even considering the other political party’s concerns, responding instead with amusement and delight. Schadenfreude, or pleasure at someone else’s pain, is now more common than solidarity or empathy across party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less