To sign up for Meridian’s Free Newsletter, please CLICK HERE
Today we are in the middle of political convention season and the war of words and fiery rhetoric that go with it. Both of the major political parties are struggling to unite and rally the American people. The path of least resistance for public discourse is to demonize your opponent and gin up your supporters with passionate but divisive language. This approach creates much heat, but little light, and keeps us a safe distance from actually solving the problems we face as a nation.
I am not suggesting that we shouldn’t compare or contrast candidates for political office. It is fine to take on a political opponent and challenge or expose their record on the merits. How we do that reveals more about us than it does about an opponent.
Words have meaning, and meaning matters. So too, tone and style are telling, and can often obscure the substance of our words and meaning. Irrespective of party politics, the speeches most often recalled from history are not those of the fiery red-meat-rhetoric variety, but are instead reflective, instructive and constructive in both substance and style. Lincoln called on our “better angels,” John F. Kennedy challenged us to “ask what we can do for our country,” and Martin Luther King invited us to look at “the content of a person’s character.”
As a student of great leadership and as someone who believes in the power of effective communication, I recently reviewed some of the great speeches in history across political parties, religious groups and business enterprises. The great speeches never require shouts, insults, demonization or self-aggrandizement. Using “I” statements, such as “I am the leader you want,” “I am the most qualified,” or “I am the answer to your problems” do little to inspire or rally people. The best speakers get out of the way and let the principles unite the listeners with the excitement of what “we the people” can do together.
In 1980, candidate Ronald Reagan delivered one of the most unique and stunning conclusions ever to a political acceptance speech. Just at the climax, when the convention hall was energized and ready to erupt, Reagan pivoted to the need for divine help and guidance on the journey toward a better America. He then asked every citizen to join him in a moment of silent prayer. Instead of ending on a red-meat applause line, Reagan ended with divinely centered silence! We clearly could use a little more silence in our public discourse.
At Sutherland Institute we are committed to empowering principles, elevated dialogue, enlightened public policy and engaged citizens. Our goal is to create uplifting conversations and public discourse, especially with those with whom we might disagree. There is a better way toward a better America – we invite all to join us in more meaningful dialogue and respectful debate.
For Sutherland Institute, this is Boyd Matheson. Thanks for engaging – because principle matters.
Boyd Matheson is president of Sutherland Institute.
This post is an edited transcript of Principle Matters, a weekly radio commentary broadcast on several radio stations across the country. The podcast can be found below.
Receive this broadcast each week directly via iTunes by clicking here.
SusanJuly 30, 2016
We are in an abusive relationship with our government. The person standing up to take on the entire establishment is coarse around the edges. So what? Think Winston Churchill who said: "How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. Not very politically correct, was he? Sounds cruel and mocking doesn't it? Comparing men to rabid dogs? How about this? In 1937, he told the Palestine Royal Commission: "I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." And: "I cannot understand this squeamishness about the use of gas," he wrote in a memo during his role as minister for war and air in 1919. "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," he continued. Hostile language toward his political opponents: "It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir… striding half-naked up the steps of the Vice-regal Palace," Churchill said of his anti-colonialist adversary in 1931. And there are more that sound tough, surly, lacking empathy, yet Churchill is considered a great statesman, and great leader during a time of absolute despair and crisis. Boldness can overstep it's bounds, but someone like Mitt Romney who comes across as affable and milquetoast, doesn't seem to be able to rise to the ocassions requiring boldness of speech.