Democracy Lives in Our Daily Habits

The recently released State of the Nation project concluded that “A gnawing sense of angst seems to have descended upon us. We seem polarized and distrustful, worried and pessimistic.” Faculty and students reflect those trends. As faith in democracy erodes and political divisions deepen, many professors and students are left wondering, “What can I do?” While some are quick to join in a long history of campus activism, others are increasingly concerned about the risky implications of participating in protests, or feel cynical that any sort of effort would even make a difference. Still others are seeking different ways to have a positive impact.

Research shows that some of the simplest things a person can do are also among the most significant: exercising humility and listening. As a philosopher of education who works to improve civic life, I know that these everyday habits are things that we can revive and nurture formally in our classrooms and informally on our campuses. At a time when so many feel bogged down by frustration, fear and anger, being more intentional in these everyday activities on our campuses can be a powerful tool for democratic renewal.

Democracy as a Way of Life

To function well, democracy requires daily actions of its citizens. Many people assume that democracy is made up of institutions and leaders who carry out its work in faraway capitols. But John Dewey, one of America’s most famous philosophers, described democracy as a way of life, something all citizens do regularly in their communities, including in their educational spaces. In recent years, citizens have become increasingly distrustful not only of democratic institutions and their leaders, but also of each other. This suggests more than ever that we cannot look elsewhere to sustain democracy; the focus must shift to ourselves.

Affective polarization leads us to view those who disagree with us as enemies rather than fellow citizens worthy of respect and consideration. We may see them as dumb, irrational and worthy of mistreatment. Failing to acknowledge them as our political equals, we are unable to understand their views when espoused in the classroom and be responsive to their demands when issued in the political sphere. This leads to an inability to learn from each other or compromise across groups. As a result, the divide between us grows and we may be tempted to blame the other side for that divide and other problems.

What we can do instead is to change how we act daily in order to better position ourselves to interact with other people, especially those with whom we disagree? Universities offer a uniquely educational context for cultivating those new habits.

Why Humility Matters More Than Ever

A starting point for doing democracy better today is to approach ideas with more humility. It has become increasingly common for people to respond to any idea by confidently asserting a position that aligns us with one political group or another. In doing so, we demonstrate our allegiance to our group.

We are certain that our side is right. Yet, too often, our group’s position may be distorted or incomplete. As philosopher Michael P. Lynch explained in Know-It-All Society, we have to recognize that any of us may be wrong about an issue and that our reasoning is often tainted by partisanship.

Rather than rushing to assert a view, we should slow down. As explained by political philosopher Robert B. Talisse, we should work to understand the limitations of our views and flaws in our reasoning, and, either independently or with like-minded peers, try to articulate reasonable alternative views. Instead of jumping straight to confrontation with those on the “other side,” we can work to first clarify and strengthen our own views.

In our classrooms, we should equip students with the tools they need to interpret data, respond to ideas and construct arguments. While professors often encourage students to critique others—from works of literature to public policy proposals—they can redirect those tools, encouraging critique of students’ own views and political tribes. Doing so can also help students see that there are good-faith disagreements with the dominant position of their own group. Moreover, as researchers and experts, professors may bristle at charges of arrogance or bias, but embracing fallibility and modeling intellectual humility for students can demonstrate our openness to ongoing learning about ourselves and others.

Paradoxically, belief polarization silences dissent, not just among our opponents but also within our own groups. Beliefs become more aligned and more extreme. Moreover, students begin to self-censor when they fear being detected as out of step with their peers or their professor. With more wide-reaching censorship efforts and demands for increased intellectual diversity on campuses raising concerns, it might come as a surprise to suggest that one way to foster and engage diverse viewpoints is to nurture humility.

Humility keeps us attuned to different and dissenting ways to see a situation, even among those with whom we generally agree or when those holding alternative viewpoints are not present. Moreover, as demonstrated by the behavioral economist Cass Sunstein, it is important to head off groupthink and arrive at better decisions. As in President Lincoln’s famous “team of rivals” cabinet, a range of competing views strengthens democracy, keeping it broad and adaptive, rather than a narrow and fixed pitting of one group against another.

Listening to Ourselves and Others

Humility also entails seeking and considering criticisms raised by our opponents. To do so, we must employ another everyday and increasingly underused habit: listening. We may think of listening as merely opening our ears to what others have to say, but there is more to listening well in our polarized context. That includes not just how we receive information from others, but also how we process it internally. We must set aside recent tendencies to shut others down with snarky comments, to win the debate or to defeat our enemies. We must bring a spirit of curiosity as we genuinely try to understand the stances of others and ourselves.

In an environment where citizens are often siloed off from those with competing political views, and given the high levels of antipathy toward political opponents, we may not be able or prepared to directly engage with those others well. Instead, a more fruitful starting point than direct communication may be engaging initially only with the beliefs and rationales of competing groups. Sometimes, setting aside the people who spark animosity, even if only temporarily, can help us do that. Notably, this is not the same as canceling speakers or protecting snowflakes, but rather emphasizes engaging with ideas that may not only differ from one’s own, but may be upsetting.

We must then work to sympathetically imagine the values of those on the other side and how they have reached their various stances. We can offer courses that focus on curiously and generously listening to understand what the other side believes and why. These might include new courses on civility that are popping up in universities across the country. University ethics and civics centers can further these steps through supporting civil discourse development. Additionally, universities can partner with organization like Braver Angels that facilitate conversations and build skills across the political aisle, not just between fellow students on one campus, but also across geographies and generations.

Civility Beyond Politeness

Humility and listening set us up to enact civility—a long-standing component of democracy that is even more important in polarized times. Too often we demand only that the other side be respectful. Again, starting with ourselves, let’s emphasize daily actions that we can take toward achieving civility, especially on campuses devoted by mission to considering a wide array of ideas and opinions.

Here I am not talking about civility as merely being polite, the sort that some might champion when students shout down speakers from “the other side” at campus events. Rather, as communication scholars Robert Danisch and William Keith argue, we should nurture a form of civility that enables us to strongly and heatedly disagree, but does so while encouraging curiosity about the other side, recognizing detested rivals as political equals and committing to ongoing communication. In this understanding of civility, we check our intellectual arrogance, open ourselves to listening to what others have to say and take up the arguments of our fellow citizens. Rather than “agreeing to disagree” or any other approach that calls for an end to talking, civility means we keep listening and exchanging ideas. Universities offer one of the best platforms for doing this in the world.

Professors and Students Can Reclaim Their Roles as Citizens

If faculty and students practice these important democratic habits every day in our campus conversations and foreground them in our classrooms, we can better navigate our political differences. By practicing humility and listening generously, we can ultimately enact civility, rebuild trust and work across our differences. Rather than counting on someone or some institution to save democracy, we can reclaim our responsibilities as citizens as we practice democracy as a way of life.