GUEST COMMENTARY: The struggling emergence of a new civility

Sunday, July 3, 2011 | 6:10 p.m. CDT

Our politics are incredibly toxic, and at times conditions only seem to be worsening. But look around and it’s possible to see the emergence of a competing set of conditions — what I’ll call the New Civility. I say it’s “new” because the old civility is about people holding hands and singing Kum-by-yah. We’re in need of something more potent and realistic.

One signal of this “new civility” is Republican Jon Huntsman’s recent announcement that he was running for president. Huntsman has gone to great lengths in setting a decidedly productive tone for his candidacy. He is upfront and clear about his differences with President Obama, while pointing out that he doesn’t question the president’s love of country or commitment. They simply disagree on a host of issues and governing philosophy.


Related Media

Of course, many Washington pundits and news media outlets have questioned the seriousness of Huntsman’s approach, saying he is running only on style and not substance, and that he will be eaten alive by his tougher and nastier Republican opponents. Or put another way, those who were better equipped to play by the rules of toxic politics.

But Huntsman is not alone in his approach. One can feel any number of political leaders seeking to move toward a New Civility, including at times House Speaker John Boehner and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Just yesterday Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney joined in, calling for political leaders to “work across the aisle.” For me, the latter example is a sign of Romney reacting to the pull of the new civility and hedging his bets. But it is telling that he feels pressure to do so, and suggests there is a growing power around the idea that we need a different way of working together.

Now, I can hear many of my friends getting antsy, even downright uncomfortable with me saying these things. But, wait a moment, please! It’s clear to me that our dominant political narrative right now is one of division and acrimony, self-dealing, and self-promotion. I get that. Last week’s conviction of former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich is Exhibit A in politics run amuck.

But, change comes about when there is an emergence of a competing narrative, which grows out of nascent pockets of change that point to the possibility of a different path. We are seeing the early signs of such pockets and the early emergence of the new, competing narrative that reflects them. I’m not naïve, I know these signs aren’t the dominant story, but to deny their existence is to enable the growth of further cynicism and to forfeit the opportunity to change course.

The substance of the New Civility is not reflective of the civility movement of the past 10 or 15 years, in which proponents adopted the oft-repeated Rodney King refrain: “Why can’t we all just get along!” The new civility is not about being friends, or “liking” each other.

Rather, it is about building respectful relationships so things can get done. It is where tough issues are put on the table and where philosophical differences are not washed away or diminished, but understood and worked with. The New Civility is one where our opponents are not evil but where there is a real battle to win the debate. It is where tough choices must be made and where real trade-offs exist. It is where “progress” and “hope” are earned only over time, based on the hard-won renewal of belief that we as individuals and collectively have the ability to get things done.

Seizing on this new civility will require us never to lose sight that we are engaged in a competition between the old and new — and that we must strategically target opportunities where existing, nascent pockets can be strengthened and new ones created. We must place a spotlight on emerging victories and not lose spirit when current conditions prevail. And we must remind ourselves that amid toxicity and destruction there is the opportunity to grab hold of real hope.

Rich Harwood is the leading national authority on encouraging and empowering people to live their best public life. He is the founder and president of The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation (, a catalytic organization dedicated to helping people imagine and act for the public good. For more than two decades, Rich has inspired and guided citizens to step forward and take action rooted in their community and stay true to themselves.

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Paul Allaire July 3, 2011 | 8:19 p.m.

No. You're absolutely wrong. So therefore I am going to do whatever it is that I can to destroy you, no matter how wrong. And I won't vote for anything that you like, even if I was going to vote for it.

(Report Comment)
Oshkosh CivilityProject July 4, 2011 | 12:43 p.m.

Let us all hope that this view is accurate ... for the consequences of further division and discord are so great for all of us.

At the Oshkosh (Wisconsin) Civility Project ( we are trying to advance a model that focuses on improving interpersonal communications as a minimum basis for improving our quality of life by attentiveness to the principles and the practices of civility. In the end, it is okay to disagree - indeed, through discussion and dialogue change is possible - and to do so without being disagreeable.

Oshkosh Civility Project - Oshkosh Wisconsin

(Report Comment)
Tim Trayle July 4, 2011 | 5:58 p.m.

Mr Harwood writes: "The substance of the New Civility is not reflective of the civility movement of the past 10 or 15 years, in which proponents adopted the oft-repeated Rodney King refrain: “Why can’t we all just get along!” The new civility is not about being friends, or “liking” each other."
I'm not sure where this notion of the "old civility" originated, but I don't recognize it. Civil behavior has always been about respecting the sincerely-held opinions of others, even when one profoundly disagrees with them. No need to invent a shiny "New" label for this--just *do* it:
1. Recognize that people who hold radically different positions from you are often trying to express an ethics or value that is deeply important to them. Hear them from that place.
2. Avoid assuming false consciousness on the part of others: "you *say* you want this, but what you *really* want to achieve is *this*." That's utterly patronizing.
3. Don't reduce other people to a symbol or label--recognize their humanity.
4. Avoid polarizing debate; speak from a place that *wants* to see why others hold their views.
5. Have enough humility to see your own limits and biases. Be aware that they are very likely affecting your own reasoning.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.