You are here: Home / Commentary / Detoxification
About Greg Stone
Greg Stone, managing director of Taming the Wolf Institute, is the author of Taming the Wolf a guide to conflict resolution in the tradition of Saint Francis. He graduated with a Masters in Dispute Resolution from the Straus Institute at the Pepperdine University Law School. He specializes in faith-based approaches to conflict resolution.
Detoxification
St. Anthony Messenger, the magazine’s editor, Pat McCloskey OFM, calls for “Detoxifying our Political Disagreements.” This is a worthy sentiment.
The editorial, however, fails to jump-start the mission. If we hope to detoxify political discourse, we must first locate the toxins poisoning the system. A doctor does not merely express hope the patient will get well and send him on his way; he diagnoses and identifies the toxins making the patient ill.
Using a “taming the wolf” approach to resolving conflict, we would investigate and attempt to identify cultural toxins poisoning public discourse. Using this approach, we find the St. Anthony’s editorial not only fails to identify toxins—it releases old toxins into the system by repeating falsehoods regarding the Tucson shootings.
The discredited accusation that the tragic shootings were linked to political speech, with Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck singled out as villains, was a dishonest attempt to smear political opponents with falsehoods. This act of bearing false witness injected poison into the public square. Such falsehoods are unworthy of being repeated. Yet the editorial injects the poisonous libel into the discourse and implies non-existent causality:
Repeating false allegations makes one complicit in hate speech. In contrast, if we wish to detoxify the discussion, we identify such false allegations as the very toxins that must be purged.
Do I believe the editor consciously intended to spread toxic speech? I seriously doubt that is the case.
Nonetheless, toxic discourse is communicable. Repeating falsehoods intended to cause harm spreads toxins. Just as we might unknowingly contract a disease and inadvertently cough on others, thus spreading the disease, the toxins of political discourse can be spread by repeating falsehoods that infect others and make them ill.
If we desire to purge poisons from the system, as we should, we identify toxins and arrive at a plan for healing. If we fail to locate the actual sources of malignancy we flail about and assign wrong targets.
In an earlier post I identified one potential source of incivility: the toxic mentality of activist organizers trained in the Saul Alinsky school of organizing. To understand the significance of the Alinsky factor we must consider two different types of toxins.
Some agents are inherently benign and act as allergens: our system finds them difficult to accommodate. Such toxins do not intend to attack the system and are not inherently poisonous—the problem lies in their incompatibility with our system.
In the cultural and political realm these “allergens” are differences in personal style, or differences in communication skill levels. They may be differences in how we approach day-to-day tasks, or differences in expectations regarding outcomes. In more extreme instances, “allergens” can be differences in cultural worldview—differences that encompass faith, values, and goals.
Differences cause “allergic reactions” that make us uncomfortable. We do not function at a peak level, and we may become irritable and difficult. Fortunately, we can acquire immunity and accommodate “foreign matter.” There are ways to diminish or eliminate the allergic reaction, for example, using mediation. We facilitate a process that helps parties find ways to work together in spite of differences. We help parties adjust to differences and improve their immunity. Parties become stronger and better able to embrace differences than before they were exposed to the “allergens.” This healing is the most frequent scenario.
However, some toxins are not inherently benign. There are poisons and malignancies designed to kill the patient. We have ample evidence showing cultural and political toxins can destroy a culture or a nation. In the 20th Century we witnessed fatal outbreaks of social disease that resulted in the deaths of millions. These illnesses are not incidental nor a simple matter of differences. The pathogen is designed to cause harm and thus is much more difficult to control. It is in its nature to cause unrest, division, and strife, social illnesses that cause societies to succumb.
An example of this pathological design can be found in Rules for Radicals, a book dedicated to Lucifer, the “very first radical.” Rules for Radicals, the bible for community organizers in the current administration, is a training manual for radical activists. In order to understand why such radicals continue to engage in toxic behavior—even after President Obama, speaking in Tucson, called for civility—one only need turn to the edicts in Alinsky’s book.
The rules call for activists to incite unrest. The rules call for deception (which explains why incivility persists despite a public call for civility). The rules instruct activists to target, ridicule, and destroy political enemies. The rules advise activists to use any means necessary to foment revolution.
When a social movement like Alinsky-inspired community organizing calls for toxic behavior, when their manual calls for an increase in the toxicity of the culture until the patient (the society) collapses (revolution), one has a serious disease that is not easily cured. If such a pathogen is allowed to run its course the patient (the culture) will not survive.
So how do we go about detoxifying political disagreements? How do we achieve the goal set out in the St. Anthony’s editorial? Correct diagnosis must precede the cure. Toxins must be properly identified. An appropriate treatment regimen must be designed and administered.
In order to restore civic health, civility in discourse, and brotherly love we need to convene an emergency triage session. Franciscans and other concerned Catholics need to meet and engage in a triage session (conference) styled as a “learning conversation” in which we identify toxins in the system and reach consensus regarding treatment.
A divided church is a weakened church. It is a civic body unable to restore and maintain its health. The learning conversation heals divisions and restores unity. This mediation–style process draws upon the personal resources, faith and experience, of attendees. The process utilizes the collective wisdom arising from differing life experiences and spiritual visions. In unison we heal.
The Catholic Church launched radical activist Alinsky’s community organizing at a time when the Church was unaware of Alinsky’s admiration for Lucifer. No doubt many in the Church had a sincere desire to expand anti-poverty efforts. This desire, compromised by Alinsky’s skilled use of deception, led to the Church’s alliance with an atheist political revolutionary and open admirer of Lucifer. Traces of such old illnesses linger, and must be treated.
Detoxification can be unpleasant. As toxins surface we may seem to become newly ill. Diligent efforts to restore health aggravate old pains. Purging poisons is no picnic. However, anything less leaves Franciscans and the Church open to infections that will condemn them to their deathbeds after a prolonged period of strife and conflict.
The alternative is collaborating on cultural detoxification. We need a healthy Franciscan community and a healthy Church if we are to meet the serious challenges that threaten our Faith, our culture, and our liberty. As we embark on a “new evangelization,” we must first root out ideologies hostile to the Faith. Only then can we go forth with spiritual health and vigor.
Now is the time to convene a learning conversation designed to bring about mutual healing, time to eschew false accusations intended to tear down our Nation and our Faith. It is time to embrace the daunting task of purging cultural toxins, time to encourage new civility and brotherly love.
We can tame the wolf and learn to speak to the hearts of those who have become cynical, those who are so damaged that destructive revolution appears to be their only option. We can bring the peace Francis promises. The Franciscan charism demands we accept this mission.
The following potpourri of links provides additional insights into the problem of civility in the public square:
Related Posts