Business Journal Op-Ed

Tolerance

During the recent presidential election season, signs for Bush-Cheney and Kerry-Edwards were planted on either side of the walkway leading up to a rose-painted brick house on Edgemont Avenue in Phoenix, Ariz., belonging to Paul Mudd and Linda MacConnell.  Arizona is a “red” state, its electoral votes landing in President Bush’s column, but opinions differed in their household.

According to an Associated Press story, Mudd supported the re-election of the president and MacConnell favored Senator Kerry.  They watched the election returns together Nov. 2 – mostly in silence – and haven’t discussed the outcome much.  She still opposes the war in Iraq, while he supports it.  She still believes Bush fights for the rich and not for the poor, while he thinks the president stands for all Americans.

An open line of communication and a dose of tolerance will help this married couple bridge their differences, yet tolerance is an oft-misunderstood word in today’s American culture.  Webster’s defines tolerance as “sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from one’s own.”  Sympathy connotes compassion and understanding but does not suggest giving up or compromising one’s beliefs.  Tolerance is not about conquering or surrendering.

How do we approach the issue of tolerance when we are apparently divided “red” and “blue” on major political and social issues and living in a society obsessed with taking sides and declaring winners and losers?  I’ve observed that the problem is exacerbated by certain trends as a result of the ever-expanding 24-hour electronic news media.    

National Public Radio correspondent Juan Williams, in a televised panel discussion following the election, said:  “There are more and more (media) outlets that are intended to simply confirm pre-existing prejudices on part of the consumer … This kind of thing really limits the ability to tell somebody else about what’s going on in another part of the country or in another part of a socio-economic divide.”

In the same panel discussion, Washington Post national political correspondent David Broder added, “It’s wonderful to have choices in the media, but when people use their choices to isolate themselves from other viewpoints and other facts, it’s not so healthy for the country.”

Most colleges are microcosms of society and can share from research and experience tips on how to deal with social problems.  At Guilford, we are about to implement a strategic plan for the next five years that has key commitments to community and diversity.  In the process, we are challenging students, faculty and staff to examine their level of tolerance.   

Here are some questions we suggest for conducting self-inspection. They may be helpful in your personal or professional life:

  • When you are part of a decision-making group, do you listen carefully to what others say, opening yourself to opinions different from your own?
  • Do you consult widely with others in making decisions, even if it means more time for the process?
  • Do you seek to understand and appreciate differing cultures and social values?
  • Do you support fair treatment regardless of race, gender, age and other differences?
  • Do you respect persons with contrasting political and social viewpoints, and encourage them to speak out?

In today’s diverse community, it is increasingly important to consider what life is like for someone who’s not like you, doesn’t think like you and doesn’t have your experiences.  In addition, it’s essential to maintain a basic respect for the other person’s intelligence, understanding that, given the same set of facts, they may interpret the facts differently and reach a different conclusion.

In my inauguration address in the spring of 2003, I asked those assembled to “let us also make Guilford College a safe space for diversity of opinion. Let’s be willing to talk about any question or issue no matter how sensitive or controversial. Debating peace and war, economic opportunity, capital punishment, women’s rights and other issues is a fundamental educational activity.”

In the aftermath of a rather divisive presidential election campaign, let us not retreat into our comfort zones waiting for the next opportunity to launch an attack on our “opponents.”  Rather, let us keep the communication lines open and encourage dialogue about all types of issues so that we might learn from one another.

This opinion-editorial was originally published in the Business Journal of the Greater Triad Area in November 2004.