We don't wish to talk about divisive matters over a meal because eating food among others is a social occasion that is best enjoyed cooperatively. Living in a polity where citizens have the right to vote for blue, red, orange, green, or whatever other colour creates division. We go to the polls every few years to roll the dice and compete with others, seeing if we can succeed in realizing our political aspirations. Even if these aspirations are constantly rolling around in our heads, we set them aside at times—such as meals with others who may not share our political beliefs—to foster social cohesion. "Social" and "political" are not synonymous, as you can have the former without the latter. Not talking about politics at the dinner table is customary.
But should this custom be accepted wholesale? Perhaps the problem is not so much talking about politics as it is talking about politics ineffectively. There's no more reason to ban political conversation in this context than there is to forbid the use of spoons simply because children tend to misuse them.
Of course, political participation is not necessarily graceful. Voters head to the ballot box, not a ballet performance. It is not an occasion for gingerly spinning, but for throwing fisticuffs into a cube of contradictory ideas.
Civil behaviour may not be able to render "equality"—"no quality" may be a more accurate term—but it covers a multitude of sins. One such sin would be name-calling. It is high time for indiscriminate insults like "Marxist" and "fascist" to stop being levelled against reasonable and ordinary New Democrats and Tories.
The Canadian federal election is upon us. What will happen tomorrow?
"Of course, political participation is not necessarily graceful..."
ReplyDeleteLove this paragraph.
Thank you! I was actually second-guessing myself on the play-on-words here, so it's validating to know that someone enjoyed it after all. :)
DeleteI would like to respond to your article by suggesting that the time around the table is the ideal time to talk politics. It is, or should be, a time of relaxation, an amiable time when topics can be discussed in a non-threatening atmosphere. I believe the scriptures encourage us as parents to instruct our children "when thou sittest in thine house and when thou walkest in the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. (Deut. 6:7) If we are encouraged to do this in order to pass on our spiritual lessons in this way, I suspect it would also be an effective way to pass on political points of view. Notice that it specifically speaks of sitting in your house, which I take to mean at the table. I believe many lessons can be taught when we have a receptive cordial audience. I believe it is extremely important to attempt to pass on our political ideology to our family, knowing that they will have to choose for themselves which line of thinking they want to follow.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment, Grandpa! I appreciate you mentioning being able to discuss politics "in a non-threatening atmosphere." In my experience, expressing one's political beliefs in such a way that doesn't back the interlocutor into one's own corner is not a particularly easy thing to do, and either upsets those who disagree or makes them pretend to agree. I've observed this from people on both sides of the political spectrum, and of course in myself.
DeleteEnjoyed the emphasis on tradition in your comment as well.