A Call for Civil Discourse

A couple of weeks ago, I phoned someone in town who is on the other side of the controversy over John. We had a long, cordial conversation and, in the end, agreed to disagree. After the Dec.2 Select Board meeting, I sent her an e-mail on one of the matters we’d discussed. In the e-mail, I made a minor error in fact – I referred to Ms. Levitre’s complaints as being about sexual harassment rather than harassment of a disabled person.

The person I’d e-mailed passed the e-mail on to a former select board member, who, on the basis of that minor error, wrote: "David. What you seem to be dealing in is propaganda, lies and innuendo. If you base your assumptions on ignorance of the facts, and then draw conclusions based on your own bias, of course you will end up where you are. Your lack of moral center in these entire proceedings has been astounding. Please do not continue to degrade yourself any further."

I took some umbrage at being called a liar and propagandist with no moral center, even if the accusations were couched in the language of concern for my well being. (“I was so sorry to hear you’re a lying sack of manure. Is there anything I can do?”) But there’s something larger than a personal attack going on here.

You can never resolve a controversy if you treat the people who disagree with you, not as opponents who need to be convinced or at least respected, but as enemies who must be shouted down and publically humiliated. There are honest and intelligent people on both sides of the recent controversy who sincerely believe they are doing what’s best for Ashfield -- I was trying to talk to one of them when I made the phone call that started this exchange. I’m calling on these honest people to turn their backs on the sort of attacks that refer to opponents as “a lynch mob” or “an ignorant crowd,” or even a lying propagandist with no moral center. Until we start treating each other with respect, we’re never going to be able to move forward as a town.

To sum it up, one of the complaints against John was that he fostered a culture of intimidation. John’s gone now, but that culture is still with us.

Respectfully,

David King