In my most recent post, I mentioned how “words matter.” I must amend that and add that tone matters. How we say what we say matters as much, or perhaps more as the words that are spoken or written.
I Hate Trump, coming out as three words with minimal prosody, are bad enough (I was led to believe that “hate” was a four-letter word and ought not be used in polite company).
But to say I Hate Trump with spittle flying and teeth baring, well, that’s clearly someone who is operating from a position of true anger. And when we act in anger, the results are not usually what we would like them to be.
I disdain Trump, or I disagree with Trump added to, I hope my elected representatives keep him somehow in check (as they are paid to do, by the way), well, that is far more rational. And rationality is so desperately needed today, tomorrow and into the foreseeable future as we engage in this thing called “self-government.”
Self-government without self-control, wrote Jefferson, is destined to fail.
Two other points worth mentioning:
(1) When you say you hate the man, is that really what you mean? I mean, do you even know the man, personally, enough to actually hate him? After all, he appears to me to be a good father, a good husband, and a patriot. So was Obama, and before him, Bush. Even Clinton.
And (2), should the words we utter not add some degree of value? If not, they should not be uttered. If they do, well, good.
Peggy Noonan speaks to this in her column from the 15th of June 2017. These are her words, not mine. I claim no ownership. Again, I am re-posting it here so that at least I have a record of her sensibility, her rationality, and frankly, her worry.
We need to be paying attention. Things could be getting much worse.
By Peggy Noonan
From June 15, 2017 8:03 p.m. ET
What we are living through in America is not only a division but a great estrangement. It is between those who support Donald Trump and those who despise him, between left and right, between the two parties, and even to some degree between the bases of those parties and their leaders in Washington. It is between the religious and those who laugh at Your Make-Believe Friend (read: God), between cultural progressives and those who wish not to have progressive ways imposed upon them. It is between the coasts and the center, between those in “flyover country” and those who decide what flyover will watch on television next season. It is between “I accept the court’s decision” and “Bake my cake.” We look down on each other, fear each other, increasingly hate each other.
Oh, to have a unifying figure, program or party.
But we don’t, nor is there any immediate prospect. So, as Ben Franklin said, we’ll have to hang together or we’ll surely hang separately. To hang together—to continue as a country—at the very least we must lower the political temperature. It’s on all of us more than ever to assume good faith, put our views forward with respect, even charity, and refuse to incite.
We’ve been failing. Here is a reason the failure is so dangerous.
In the early 1990s Roger Ailes had a talk show on the America’s Talking network (Fox) and invited me to talk about a concern I’d been writing about, which was old-fashioned even then: violence on TV and in the movies. Grim and graphic images, repeated depictions of murder and beatings, are bad for our kids and our culture, I argued. Depictions of violence unknowingly encourage it.
But look, Roger said, there’s comedy all over TV and I don’t see people running through the streets breaking into laughter. True, I said, but the problem is that, for a confluence of reasons, our country is increasingly populated by the not fully stable. They aren’t excited by wit, they’re excited by violence—especially unstable young men. They don’t have the built-in barriers and prohibitions that those more firmly planted in the world do. That’s what makes violent images dangerous and destructive. Art is art and censorship is an admission of defeat. Good judgment and a sense of responsibility are the answer.
That’s what we’re doing now, exciting the unstable—not only with images but with words, and on every platform. It’s all too hot and revved up. This week we had a tragedy. If we don’t cool things down, we’ll have more.
And was anyone surprised? Tuesday, I talked with an old friend, a figure in journalism who’s a pretty cool character, about the political anger all around us. He spoke of “horrible polarization.” He said there’s “too much hate in D.C.” He mentioned “the beheading, the play in the park” and described them as “dog whistles to any nut who wants to take action.”
“Someone is going to get killed,” he said.
That was 20 hours before the shootings in Alexandria, Va.
The gunman did the crime, he is responsible, it’s fatuous to put the blame on anyone or anything else.
But we all operate within a climate and a culture. The media climate now, in both news and entertainment, is too often of a goading, insinuating resentment, a grinding, agitating antipathy.
You don’t need another recitation of the events of just the past month or so.
- A comic (Kathy Griffin) posed with a gruesome bloody facsimile of President Trump’s head.
- New York’s rightly revered Shakespeare in the Park put on a “Julius Caesar” in which the assassinated leader is made to look like the president.
- A CNN host—amazingly, of a show on religion (!)—sent out a tweet calling the president a “piece of shit” who is “a stain on the presidency.”
- An MSNBC anchor wondered, on the air, whether the president wishes to “provoke” a terrorist attack for political gain. (Really? You really mean that?)
- Stephen Colbert, well known as a good man, a gentleman, said of the president, in a rant: “The only thing your mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin’s cunt holster.”
Those are but five dots in a larger, darker pointillist painting. You can think of more.
Too many in the mainstream media—not all, but too many—don’t even bother to fake fairness and lack of bias anymore, which is bad: Even faked balance is better than none.
Yes, they have reasons. They find Mr. Trump to be a unique danger to the republic, an incipient fascist; they believe it is their patriotic duty to show opposition. They don’t like his policies. A friend suggested recently that they hate him also because he’s in their business, show business. Who is he to be president? He’s not more talented. And yet as soon as his presidency is over he’ll get another reality show.
And there’s something else. Here I want to note the words spoken by Kathy Griffin, the holder of the severed head. In a tearful news conference, she said of the president, “He broke me.” She was roundly mocked for this. Oh, the big bad president’s supporters were mean to you after you held up his bloody effigy. But she was exactly right: He did break her. He robbed her of her sense of restraint and limits, of her judgment. He broke her, but not in the way she thinks, and he is breaking more than her.
We have been seeing a generation of media figures cratering under the historical pressure of Donald Trump. He really is powerful.
They’re losing their heads. Now would be a good time to regain them.
They have been making the whole political scene lower, grubbier. They are showing the young what otherwise estimable adults do under pressure, which is lose their equilibrium, their knowledge of themselves as public figures, as therefore examples—tone setters. They’re paid a lot of money and have famous faces and get the best seat, and the big thing they’re supposed to do in return is not be a slob. Not make it worse.
By indulging their and their audience’s rage, they spread the rage. They celebrate themselves as brave for this. They stood up to the man, they spoke truth to power. But what courage, really, does that take? Their audiences love it. Their base loves it, their demo loves it, their bosses love it. Their numbers go up. They get a better contract. This isn’t brave.
If these were only one-offs, they’d hardly be worth comment, but these things build on each other. Rage and sanctimony always spread like a virus, and become stronger with each iteration.
And it’s no good, no excuse, to say Trump did it first, he lowered the tone, it’s his fault. Your response to his low character is to lower your own character? He talks bad so you do? You let him destabilize you like this? You are making a testimony to his power.
So many of our media figures need at this point to be reminded: You belong to something. It’s called: us.
Do your part, take it down a notch, cool it.
We have responsibilities to each other.
