EDITORIAL / ANNE BARRON

Where's the civil in Highland Park discourse?

The recent campaign cycle was described in the June 10 Mirror, I think accurately, as "the ugliest campaign we have had."

I had already seen the high level of civic discourse some Highland Parkers are capable of in previous campaigns. This was usually via the upswing of the notorious "rumour mill."

At a recent party I heard opponents of the incumbents were described as "crazy" and "complainers" but not much in the way of proof or critique.

The favored technique of incumbents in an uncomfortable race has been to question the opponent's fitness to serve, or inexperience, or psychological well-being.

Let's face it, not many of us can withstand that sniping.

This uncivil discourse is an American tradition, dating as far back as the Adams-Jefferson contest. But we must do better. The lack of civil discourse, agreeing to disagree and finding common ground, speaking openly and with many voices, arguing philosophical and historical differences, is an attack on democracy.

Ferocious acolytes of either camp seem to focus on the perceived defects and idiosyncrasies of the "other." The listener, if any takes the time to look past this barrage, is usually left with insult and innuendo rather than debate and rebuttal.

The latest campaign was rare in that the challengers actually put their hornet's nest of tenuous association and sins of omission on paper.

Even more surprising, their assertions of terrible mismanagement and horrible malfeasance arrived by mail to John and Joan Q. Public, in the days before the election.

Previously, these salvos were issued either during long, drawn-out council meetings, or during campaign events. Local literature tended to be upbeat, focusing on the credentials and fine leadership of the candidate paying for the stamps.

Perhaps the Wolf campaign resorted to the brochures because borough council meetings are now so few in number and short in duration. Perhaps they got a large contribution to pay for the glossy attack ads. Whatever.

It is fair to say that the borough hummed with electronic outrage and letters to the editor jammed the Home News Tribune.

Chair of the local cable access committee, Gary Leslie, worked hard to schedule a debate, hosted by the non-partisan League of Women Voters and aired on HP-TV. But it was not to be.

So what is a voter to do, when hit by such a barrage of charges in the days before the all-important election? What to do, given statewide media's lack of interest in this local contest?

The failure of the political parties to ensure public debates in our borough is a failure of democracy, a failure of local leaders to ensure that voters are informed about the real issues and constraints that confront us here in Highland Park and on the national stage.

The drum beat of personality attack -- or even worse, a candidate's (gasp) lack of values -- strengthens the call to demagoguery, always a temptation for a democratic society. The thrust of ideas becomes the battle of sound bites; and the cult of personality is lifted to the level of political fetish.

In the meantime I intend to ignore any campaign literature received the week before any election, and to ignore the rumour mill. I hope you'll do the same.