The dilemmas of civility

Alexandra Hudson argues that our post-Christian society has kept the concept of sin, but forgotten the virtues of forgiveness - to the detriment of discourse.

The idea that society is living through an age of incivility has become commonplace. Whether it is slur-filled social-media exchanges, politicians slipping beyond the bounds of civil discourse, or invective- filled interactions in the media and the wider public square, many worry that contemporary society is undermined by the toxicity of our relations with others. This week, the Cass Review of gender-identity services for children and young people, became the latest official report to cite the dangers of toxic and polarised public debate. 

As a consequence, society is awash with initiatives to rekindle civil society. Think tanks report on creating a new ethos of civility in the face of technological developments. Employers research how better-mannered workplaces might boost the bottom line; universities cultivate respectful conversation skills amongst students.

Few would object to us all thinking through how to improve the quality of our interactions with our colleagues, communities and fellow citizens as a means to cultivating the ‘good society’. But are there dangers in the quest for civility? Offence culture and worries over intolerance are often now used to justify new legislation, such as on hate crime, and the quest for imposed behavioural norms and codes that curtail precious freedoms and free speech. In responding to the demand for civility, are we in danger of undermining rather than supporting toleration and other long-standing freedoms?

One problem is that relatively few people stop to ask in any meaningful way what we mean by ‘civility’. However, one contribution to the debate that delves into the history of civility is the recently published The Soul of Civility by Alexandra Hudson. Below, Hudson argues that cultivating civility can be an antidote to cancel culture. You can join her and have your say on civility at one of two events in London next week.

Living Freedom Forum: The Dilemmas of Civility
Alexandra Hudson, Noah Khogali and Samuel Rubinstein
Wednesday 17 April, 7:00pm, Ideas Matter
Register here

Young Voices UK Presents: An Evening with Alexandra Hudson
Tuesday 16 April, 6:30pm, Institute of Economic Affairs
Register here

---

---

It’s time to ‘unbundle’ people

Alexandra Hudson

Today, we often reduce people to their worst moment - a thing they said or did of which they are probably not proud, but which, thanks to technology and social media, has been immortalised and widely circulated.

It is time that we start ‘unbundling’ people.

Our current culture views the world and people through a cheapened simplicity. Everything, and everyone, is either right or wrong, good or evil. We define people based on one thing they’ve done or said, sometimes even if it occurred years or decades ago, and ‘cancel’ them for it. This view of the world and people is reductive, essentialising, and degrading to the diversity and beauty of the human personality.

We’ve adopted a strange perfectionism, where we expect those around us to make no errors in judgement, past or present.

We’ve forgotten that, as human beings, each of us is defined by love of others, and love of self -and our inherent self-love ensures we will make decisions that harm others and benefit ourselves.

We’ve overlooked that within each of us is a little bit good and a little bit bad.

Unbundling people is a mental framework we can use to help us see the part in light of the whole, mistakes in light of virtues, our lapses in judgement in light of our irreducible dignity and worth as persons. As human beings, we are each an amalgamation of contradictory impulses and desires. We are each imperfect.

Can we challenge ourselves to hold multiple traits and characteristics of others - to see the virtues in others alongside the vices - at once? Can we recognise the mistakes of others while at the same time staying mindful of the irreducible human dignity of our fellow human beings and the basic respect they are owed in light of that?

Our culture demands perfection from each of us, a task we’re bound to fail.

As Alexander Pope wrote in An Essay on Criticism: ‘To err is human, to forgive, divine.’ To expect perfection from ourselves or others is to set ourselves up to fail. It is wishfully thinking that we transcend our nature as fallen, fallible and imperfect beings. By contrast, when we embrace the inevitability of failure, and choose to forgive readily and freely, we manifest the best version of ourselves, and as Pope observed, reflect the likeness of God.

We lack forgiveness and deny redemption when we invariably make mistakes, keeping us further separated and alienated form one another. This strange perfectionism essentialises the human person. It is degrading to our dignity as human beings, and detrimental to community.

We human beings are fallible. Error is part and parcel of our existence. How can we free ourselves and our culture from this utopian vision of a perfect human being?

Today, we seem to only remember what is immediately before us. Whatever word or deed a person says here and now - especially if it is objectionable - becomes the only thing that we see and that matters. Whatever they did before - whatever relationship we had built with them, whatever trust we had with them, whatever good they did or achieved - doesn’t matter. Neither does anything they might achieve in the future matter. We must remember the infinite complexity of the human person, and learn to hold multiple things to be true about others at once.

Many of us have likely felt first-hand the frustration of being misunderstood, reduced and cut off based on one small aspect of who we are. Just as we wish people to stay mindful of our own complexity of motivation, experience and identity, we must stay mindful of the complex nature of others. Though we are tempted to oversimplify others, we each come to our beliefs for many reasons, and we must stay curious about the reasons and stories behind the beliefs of those with whom we disagree.

We must begin looking inward, and reflecting on our own shortcomings. Few of us would like our entire lives to be defined by a single mistake or moment of weakness. Why would we do that to others? In our post-Christian society, we have kept the concept of sin, but lost the concept of forgiveness. We must create more room for grace in our hearts and lives to create more room for grace in our culture.

As we don’t wish to be shamed and defined by one aspect of who we are, we should avoid doing that to others. We must stay mindful of the complex nature of humanity. We must see the part of people - the mistakes, the bad ideas, the shortcomings - in light of the whole, and the irreducible dignity and worth of other human beings. We must unbundle people.

Who are some people you can ‘unbundle’ in your own life - friends, family, public figures?

Can we stay curious about the reasons and stories behind the beliefs of those with whom we disagree?

I hope so.

A free and flourishing society depends on it.