Byron's Babbles

Typical Discourse

Posted in Civilized Disdain, Discourse, Educational Leadership, Global Leadership, Leadership, NASBE, Typical Discourse by Dr. Byron L. Ernest on October 19, 2019

IMG_7106Earlier this week during our National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) Board of Directors meeting a comment was made during a discussion about our Public Education Position report about “typical discourse”. The comment was that we did not practice typical discourse any more. This got me thinking about what was “typical discourse”, anyway? I guess I see typical discourse as having vigorous debate about what to do with challenges and opportunities. This vigorous, honest, and transparent debate must involve all stakeholders, different political parties, and the entire political spectrum.

So, we have a complicated challenge on so many fronts. These fronts include education reform, equity issues, workforce, economy, and real human suffering just to name a few. This amounts to desperate need for a vigorous debate and our best thinking. Instead, it seems we have become a society of character assassination. In many cases we have become trivial, oriented toward turf protection, and despicable. This reminds me of what I believe the Ancient Greeks called an “ad hominem” attack. With this attack, the opponent attacks us personally, changes the subject, and uses “virtue signaling”. I blogged about virtue signaling in Leading Without “Virtue Signaling”.

Bottom line: we have strayed from civilized disdain and discourse and safe disagreement. I blogged about these in Safe Disagreement and Civilized Disdain Vs. Political Correctness. We need to find a way to turn discourse back to something substantial. Let’s work together to get to useful dialogue.

Loving America

Posted in Civil War, Civilized Disdain, Community, Democracy, Global Leadership, Leadership, Political Correctness by Dr. Byron L. Ernest on July 12, 2019

Recently, I was in a group that had individuals continually bashing the United States. Keep in mind these were fellow U.S. citizens. I really have a problem with this; our country is not perfect, has things to improve on, and people with different values and ideals than mine, but I love our country and would never speak ill of it. This is not me challenging their motives because they hold a different worldview than mine, but that I would rather there be a discussion of specific beliefs and differences in opinions. I wrote about this while celebrating on country’s birth on July 4th in 2015 in Civilized Disdain Vs. Political Correctness. When studying our history it is found that we have become an incredible collection of states and people because of our, sometimes violent, differences.

I finished the great book, The Field Of Blood: Violence in Congress and the Road To the Civil War, by Joanne Freeman, a couple of weeks ago and learned about the very violent confrontations in our legislature over differences. These differences led to physical violence. Freeman’s research-based approach to this book tells us of how debate and disagreements would break down into violent fights, including duels, canings, fist fights, knife fights, and all out brawls. None of this took place in a state of vacuity; the media of the time were involved as well as other prominent figures. All the actors in this book, I believe, had a great love for our country, but were in a time when this barbarousness, while not accepted by all, still took place. These differences ultimately ended in a Civil War, that ultimately tested our bonds of union and democracy.

Loving the United States, or anyone’s country for that matter, well means taking her seriously and working to preserve what lovely about her and to help to fix what is not. Instead, for many, their love of their country is conditional. As long as everything is on the course they choose, they are full of patriotism and love and enjoying all the traditions and ceremonies. Conversely, when things are not going to the liking of these individuals, they have no respect for our officials, our ceremonies, or our traditions. So, if the love of one’s country is conditional this way for some; I would argue that it is not love of country, but love of self being substituted for love of country.

My love for my State of Indiana and the United States is not transitory. There can be no falling in and out of love. Even when I am disappointed or working very hard to make things better, my love is permanent.