The Philippine political landscape has been extremely divisive in the last few months. The current administration has divided the country into opposing sides and this binary debate has trickled down to every crevice of our society up to the most basic unit, that being families. It has resulted to friends disassociating from each other, work relations being affected and strained family ties. All due to the very diametrical stance on politics
for Filipinos today.
Moreover, due to the rise of social media; what used to be the prevailing viewpoint being a very liberal democratic approach and humanist worldview in which the liberal thinkers, the catholic church, the intellectual class and mass media having monopoly of the discourse, has drastically changed. This is due to the emergence of digital technologies, allowing anyone who has access to be able to have a platform to express their own political view and critique and articulate their own perspectives.
With the rise of these platforms where everyone’s voices can be heard, the aggressiveness in the manner in which we communicate with each other to those with dissenting opinions have become acerbic, from trolling to death threats, the discourse in which we communicate with each other has turned for the worse. One can argue that this vigorous support, fanatical devotion or stance in politics suggest that such support is a product of constant anxiety. This gains currency from the vocabulary of crisis, fear and danger, and is strengthened by enactments of democratic agency among citizens who have been in the margins of politics for a long time. Anxiety constricts the space of political discourse by invoking tough language for us to express our frustrations, anger and aspirations.
Due to this, a need arises for us to reflect on how we communicate with each other in terms of discussing our political views. The simplest approach to stay civil is to simply refrain from any discussion on politics.
But shouldn’t reasonably sensible adults be able to discuss politics without the conversation turning acrimonious?
Politics, it seems, is a common topic among filipinos now more than ever, and one wonders how should one deal with such contentious topic in an increasingly volatile political atmosphere.
How to Engage
Find a common ground
Identify the nuances of each other’s positions. Listen to people with openness. If the person concurs with something you oppose, that doesn’t mean you should discount what they are saying, what you can do instead is find a common ground. You can make room for one another to see things in a different perspective, and you may find commonalities. You may both share the same positive thoughts on certain actions or on the inappropriateness of certain behaviors practiced by the administration or the opposition. Be open to discovering those points of connection and keep an open mind. Far better as you listen to an opposing perspective to look for something you can agree with.The greater expression of agreement, the more the dialogue will feel productive.
It may be that while you clash on certain points, you can agree on a larger more valuable position. You may have common hopes and aspirations in terms of key policies which can steer the country to a much faster road to progress for all. Almost all disagreements are due to diverging views on strategy and not purpose, so looking for areas where you are both aligned can make for a more enriching point of discussion. Finds areas of consensus rather than contention. Look for a more substantial principle governing differing opinions and you’ll most certainly find a mutual justification behind your convictions.
Take it as an opportunity to Learn from one another and not to Persuade
Approach political conversations as an opportunity to learn from others and not to change minds, push your own perspectives or to judge another’s choice. Plainly being eager to learn about another’s position is sufficient motivation to engage in a political discussion. However, if your intention is of converting the other person you’ll be inclined to become Machiavellic or coercive. Consider what you have to gain through understanding what’s most important to the other person. Think about how you’ll benefit from learning the reasons behind an alternative viewpoint.
Trying to sway the other person’s political leanings is often an act of futility. Consider what is your predisposition in stepping into political conversations. Is it with the intent to understand—or to persuade? Now’s the moment to frame a course on the basis of mutual exchange. Set a higher intention when conversing and let it serve as your compass as the discussion takes place.
Gaining real understanding of another person’s position doesn’t mean you have to agree or alter your own stance. Healthy political discussions are based on respect, even when you don’t agree. Respect the other person’s views in the same manner you’d like them to respect yours.You may find greater appreciation on how to respectfully disagree. Think about the benefit you gain through learning to encourage understanding—instead of eroding it—through opposition. Such a skill is, nowadays, becoming a lost art.
When to Disengage
A pattern that can be observed within political discussions, is the reluctance to allow the others to express their side. As soon as someone expresses a view that differs from their own, they shut off, over talk or attack the personality of another so alternative viewpoints cannot be heard.
It may be very tempting to expose the inaccuracies of the other party. But it’s seriously narrow-minded. Someone who is unsure of the validity of his argument or is failing to sustain an intelligent debate will be tempted to resort to inflammatory language and insults. Such language only engender rancor and will quickly steer the discussion into a pointless exercise. Derogatory labeling similarly does not add any value to the conversation and does not put forward engagement e.g. Yellowtards or Dutertards.
When emotions are running high, conflicting views over politics can deteriorate the discussion. Before that occurs, the best route is to agree to disagree or simply disengage and not press your point no matter how correct you believe your opinion to be. If you demean another person, it’s very hard to converse with them. The point of discussions is not to coerce, but to understand. It’s possible for people to have opposing viewpoints without resorting to derogatory comments. Present your points in a composed, well-reasoned manner. The ability to tolerate and learn from differences is essential to a healthy discourse.
A lot of controversial issues are contentious because there is no easy answer. Provided all the available evidences and facts, intelligent, reasonable people can come to radically different interpretations on issues like the war on drugs, death penalty, human rights abuses, etc.
Unless someone is vociferously advocating bigotry, intolerance or violence, take the highroad and disengage. When there are clear indications that the conversation is becoming one-sided or is about to escalate, be the bigger person and walk away.
Civility is Key
Civility speaks of our ability to disagree while simultaneously uplifting one another. Through civility we refine the art of engaging with others. As there are no absolute truths that can hold us together, it is only our fervent bid to civilized discourse that allows us to preserve the sacred space that makes conversing, most especially in terms of politics, possible. Everytime we forgo the proper way of talking to each other in regards to how we express our views, an inch of our democratic space dies.
The false binary of pro or anti administration does not lend any analytical coherence to these positions for they are far more nuanced, complex and continually negotiated.
Now is a very good time to open up ourselves up to be heard and to hear the views of one another to have better understanding. More than sharp critique, what would greatly benefit our public sphere is a more nuanced weighing of the various issues in regards to politics.
for Filipinos today.
Moreover, due to the rise of social media; what used to be the prevailing viewpoint being a very liberal democratic approach and humanist worldview in which the liberal thinkers, the catholic church, the intellectual class and mass media having monopoly of the discourse, has drastically changed. This is due to the emergence of digital technologies, allowing anyone who has access to be able to have a platform to express their own political view and critique and articulate their own perspectives.
With the rise of these platforms where everyone’s voices can be heard, the aggressiveness in the manner in which we communicate with each other to those with dissenting opinions have become acerbic, from trolling to death threats, the discourse in which we communicate with each other has turned for the worse. One can argue that this vigorous support, fanatical devotion or stance in politics suggest that such support is a product of constant anxiety. This gains currency from the vocabulary of crisis, fear and danger, and is strengthened by enactments of democratic agency among citizens who have been in the margins of politics for a long time. Anxiety constricts the space of political discourse by invoking tough language for us to express our frustrations, anger and aspirations.
Due to this, a need arises for us to reflect on how we communicate with each other in terms of discussing our political views. The simplest approach to stay civil is to simply refrain from any discussion on politics.
But shouldn’t reasonably sensible adults be able to discuss politics without the conversation turning acrimonious?
Politics, it seems, is a common topic among filipinos now more than ever, and one wonders how should one deal with such contentious topic in an increasingly volatile political atmosphere.
How to Engage
Find a common ground
Identify the nuances of each other’s positions. Listen to people with openness. If the person concurs with something you oppose, that doesn’t mean you should discount what they are saying, what you can do instead is find a common ground. You can make room for one another to see things in a different perspective, and you may find commonalities. You may both share the same positive thoughts on certain actions or on the inappropriateness of certain behaviors practiced by the administration or the opposition. Be open to discovering those points of connection and keep an open mind. Far better as you listen to an opposing perspective to look for something you can agree with.The greater expression of agreement, the more the dialogue will feel productive.
It may be that while you clash on certain points, you can agree on a larger more valuable position. You may have common hopes and aspirations in terms of key policies which can steer the country to a much faster road to progress for all. Almost all disagreements are due to diverging views on strategy and not purpose, so looking for areas where you are both aligned can make for a more enriching point of discussion. Finds areas of consensus rather than contention. Look for a more substantial principle governing differing opinions and you’ll most certainly find a mutual justification behind your convictions.
Take it as an opportunity to Learn from one another and not to Persuade
Approach political conversations as an opportunity to learn from others and not to change minds, push your own perspectives or to judge another’s choice. Plainly being eager to learn about another’s position is sufficient motivation to engage in a political discussion. However, if your intention is of converting the other person you’ll be inclined to become Machiavellic or coercive. Consider what you have to gain through understanding what’s most important to the other person. Think about how you’ll benefit from learning the reasons behind an alternative viewpoint.
Trying to sway the other person’s political leanings is often an act of futility. Consider what is your predisposition in stepping into political conversations. Is it with the intent to understand—or to persuade? Now’s the moment to frame a course on the basis of mutual exchange. Set a higher intention when conversing and let it serve as your compass as the discussion takes place.
Gaining real understanding of another person’s position doesn’t mean you have to agree or alter your own stance. Healthy political discussions are based on respect, even when you don’t agree. Respect the other person’s views in the same manner you’d like them to respect yours.You may find greater appreciation on how to respectfully disagree. Think about the benefit you gain through learning to encourage understanding—instead of eroding it—through opposition. Such a skill is, nowadays, becoming a lost art.
When to Disengage
A pattern that can be observed within political discussions, is the reluctance to allow the others to express their side. As soon as someone expresses a view that differs from their own, they shut off, over talk or attack the personality of another so alternative viewpoints cannot be heard.
It may be very tempting to expose the inaccuracies of the other party. But it’s seriously narrow-minded. Someone who is unsure of the validity of his argument or is failing to sustain an intelligent debate will be tempted to resort to inflammatory language and insults. Such language only engender rancor and will quickly steer the discussion into a pointless exercise. Derogatory labeling similarly does not add any value to the conversation and does not put forward engagement e.g. Yellowtards or Dutertards.
When emotions are running high, conflicting views over politics can deteriorate the discussion. Before that occurs, the best route is to agree to disagree or simply disengage and not press your point no matter how correct you believe your opinion to be. If you demean another person, it’s very hard to converse with them. The point of discussions is not to coerce, but to understand. It’s possible for people to have opposing viewpoints without resorting to derogatory comments. Present your points in a composed, well-reasoned manner. The ability to tolerate and learn from differences is essential to a healthy discourse.
A lot of controversial issues are contentious because there is no easy answer. Provided all the available evidences and facts, intelligent, reasonable people can come to radically different interpretations on issues like the war on drugs, death penalty, human rights abuses, etc.
Unless someone is vociferously advocating bigotry, intolerance or violence, take the highroad and disengage. When there are clear indications that the conversation is becoming one-sided or is about to escalate, be the bigger person and walk away.
Civility is Key
Civility speaks of our ability to disagree while simultaneously uplifting one another. Through civility we refine the art of engaging with others. As there are no absolute truths that can hold us together, it is only our fervent bid to civilized discourse that allows us to preserve the sacred space that makes conversing, most especially in terms of politics, possible. Everytime we forgo the proper way of talking to each other in regards to how we express our views, an inch of our democratic space dies.
The false binary of pro or anti administration does not lend any analytical coherence to these positions for they are far more nuanced, complex and continually negotiated.
Now is a very good time to open up ourselves up to be heard and to hear the views of one another to have better understanding. More than sharp critique, what would greatly benefit our public sphere is a more nuanced weighing of the various issues in regards to politics.
