An Uncivil Peace
Civility Is Not A Good Thing
I remember when Johnny Isakson, the retiring Senator from Georgia whose ill health enabled Democrats to win the Senate, actually retired, there was a moment where he and John Lewis hugged on the floor of the House. Many found that moment inspiring. When I saw it? I barfed.
Isakson was a reliable vote for an agenda that served to diminish the rights of people like John Lewis, poor people, Black people, the powerless and the dispossessed, and personally, people like me. Isakson was a bigot, voting in 2013 against legislation to make it illegal for gay people to be fired without cause - or, more accurately, Isakson voted to ensure that homosexuality was still considered just cause for termination, along with 31 other Senate colleagues, and yet it is considered uncouth to say this. It is a failure of a civil politics to hate your opponents, because back in the day everyone could pour a drink and make a deal.
For some reason, it is said that bipartisanship is a good thing, something to be advocated for, and that polarization and partisanship is bad. No it isn't - it is the only good we have when faced with great evil. The GOP are a racist, sexist, homophobic political party, but for some reason the party of equality is supposed to put that aside in search of unity. There can be no unity on whether or not I am equal under the law to someone else, but yet, the question remains.
Civility is fine at a charity dinner - I used to work in and around politics in a G7 capital, and I understand how a need for civility works. I've been people's plus-one, having to blandly smile and nod while I'm told things that were either just blithe nonsense or factually inaccurate, and I've told more than my fair share of inoffensive, yet funny, party stories, chosen both for their comedic value but also their broad appeal. Your table has spent a bit too long discussing the merits (or lack thereof) of a Trudeau government? Here, have a story of the time that my boss got so mad I had to physically restrain him from sending a potentially career ending email. It's how the world works, and at times I partook in it easily and willingly.
The problem is, when I hear people pining for the days of unbeatable incumbents and huge personal votes, of person defying partisanship, I don't hear the good old days. I hear a cry for a time when the actual importance of elections was minimal and where things were mostly inconsequential. What I hear is pining for the days when Democrats were also homophobes, as if it's supposed to make me feel any better that the people voting for repressive, anti-gay laws happened to have (D) next to their names. When everyone talks about the old days of civility I think of the Defence Of Marriage Act, a moment of great bipartisan consensus of my lifetime. It was also, beyond its fairly inconsequential practical effects, a press release of homophobia that helped internalize into me years later that defending the institution of marriage from people like me was more important than defending me from bigotry and pain. But hey, at least Bill Clinton could get things done with a hostile Congress.
Whenever calls for civility come, it almost always comes from the powerful seeking to inoculate themselves from the true effects of their decisions. It is a call for them to face no consequences for horrible treatment of people - to not have any mild mistreatment handed to them, despite causing such great mistreatment on so many. "It's just politics" is a fantastic way to deny yourself the agency of your actions - but if you voted for a Republican elected official, no matter how moderate, no matter your reason, you voted for a political party that thinks people like me should not be full and equal Americans under the law. Finding behind "it's just politics" so that you can continue to have everything that you have now is spitting in my face and then expecting me to get over it.
Political differences should matter, and it is hard to respect somebody who believes not in a different solution to a problem but in a different definition of problem. Sure, in an ideal world the US would be less polarized, but that would be because Republicans become pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and unanimously pass a new Voting Rights Act. I won't hold my breath. Short of that sort of total capitulation, though, Democrats should not seek civility or common ground with their opponents. They should serve the country, and their own values, and tell the GOP that if they want unity, they want healing, they want the good old days, that the path exists - but it runs through the GOP moving to meet Democrats where they are. If that means that the next four years are a deeply uncivil peace, then Democrats should be ready for that. Better some uncivil peace than any amount of civility with bigots and traitors.