Yesterday, I described one way in which my local blog, Rockville Central, is different from our local newspaper, even though my blog contains “news.” The key lies in the purpose behind the blog, which is to improve community life in the town I call home.
In essence, with Rockville Central I am trying to open up a civic space for other people to step into.
Today I want to describe what it can look like when that really works. I want to tell you about my friend, Temperance.
I have never had a conversation with Temperance directly, except to perhaps say “hi.” She knows what I look like, I know what she looks like. We have interacted by email and in the comments section of Rockville Central. We are “friends” on Facebook. I count her as a real friend, not a fake online friend. She’s a neighbor.
There’s been a very divisive issue in town for many months now. Temperance has strong feelings about it, and is on the side opposite from a number of very vocal community members. As the issue unfolded, she seemed to find her voice in some of the comments that she wrote.
I did not know Temperance before starting the blog, so maybe she was just as eloquent in public statements all along. But as I watched it seemed to me I was watching someone come to achieve a degree of comfort and leadership that had been less visible before.
On this tough issue, Temperance advocated for her ideas very well.
Now there’s a new issue before the community, equally divisive. On a recent article, the comment trail has included a lot of complaining about “officials not listening” to ordinary citizens.
Temperance stepped in and crafted one of the most eloquent descriptions of the special role we ask public officials to play that I have ever read:
Many of the people who have a perception that they are being ignored or “not listened to” in political exchanges are often the ones who are operating from a highly-charged emotional state of anger or frustration, and feel that the anger itself should be sufficient to motivate their officials to react in a certain way. From the time of our Revolution, through the Civil War, to the scores of conflicts and issues of the 20th century and into our currently polarized blue state/red state millennium, Americans have always been politically exuberant. But it’s disturbing to realize how little we’ve evolved as citizens or human beings that we are still so easily inflamed into behavior that is often so polluted with emotional rage that the perspective of the actual issues at hand is obscured or distorted, if not sometimes completely forgotten. I admit to being susceptible to it myself.
It’s sad to see how many of the issues affecting Rockville frequently degenerate into forums for personal attacks and intimidation.
Do we really want our elected officials to make decisions based primarily on the level of emotion displayed at public hearings, rather than on what they may feel to be the best interests of the entire citizenry, and not just the subset who were motivated enough to show up and yell? I’m reminded of the [another issue, when at a meeting] opponents claimed that their overwhelming presence and volume at the hearing was “evidence” that [everyone] opposed [it]. In fact, many supporters . . . , such as myself, refrained from attending this meeting (and several others) out of sheer fear of the level of emotion. I have a lot of sympathy for the public officials who listen to this type of testimony and can remain calm enough to properly evaluate the situation. While political officials should most definitely listen to their constituents, they should not base their actions on what sometimes amounts to a mob mentality.
This could have been written by any number of my learned colleagues in the civic participation community. But it was written by Temperance, advising her fellow citizens to remember the roles that we all play in public life.
Often, my civic participation colleagues discuss democratic theory as if it takes an advanced degree and specialized training to delve into such weighty topics as whether we elect people as delegates or as representatives, or such as how citizens can begin to set aside self-interest as they consider what is best for their communities. I have heard people discuss “framing issues” as if this were a secret skill that takes years of practice to even become an apprentice.
But the reality is that a practical understanding of what it means to employ self-rule is something that we all share, to differing degrees. And you see this when you trust open civic spaces enough to let the true leaders emerge and help guide the conversation toward properly democratic ends.
Temperance is a true leader.
That’s what can happen when you simply invite people to enter public life and give them a space safe enough that they begin to feel comfortable.
They step forward — because that’s what we do.
Brad Rourke's Blog 
Temperance is an eloquent and passionate advocate who is well-deserving of your praise, Brad. Thank you for this piece and giving us all the opportunity to speak–and be heard–through your blog.
Great Post;
I can certainly agree with the subject. Very good outlook and if only there where more,that had the same outlook. Of course that is what makes us so unique.
Since we are a republic, it the responsibility of the leaders to weigh what they think is correct and act on that.
Thanks for the great article.
Lowell
I really appreciate the thoughtfulness of this whole exposition. I am reminded of a thought I have had from time to time, that though I may agree or disagree with, for instance. President Bush, on certain subjects, I would reeeallly hesitate to step into his shoes and face the difficult situations he has faced for all of us. So, I am just grateful that he was willing to “do the job” for us, and take the falk that from time to time goes with it. As a boy, our President’s name for a time was Truman, and our family, being Republican, I had a rather poor opinion of him. Then I read a book titled “Truman”, that laid out what an unselfish man he was — retiring from the presidency with no pension, and was essentially a “poor” man, considering the exalted positions he had served in. During World War I, he was old enough he didn’t have to join the army—but he did. In those days, according to the book, the enlisted men ELECTED their officers, and he was elected. My understanding is that he and another fellow came up with the idea that turned into Post Exchanges for his men. Anyway, enough. I am just grateful we have some men and women unselfish enough to serve in these controversial posts.