There was a time when I considered debates, particularly political debates, to be an informative discourse wherein opposing or alternative viewpoints were aired and discussed. Probing questions served to illuminate the strength or weakness of a given position and we, as citizens, learned a lot about the depth of a given participant. Sadly, modern debates have devolved into a travelling road show whose purpose is not to inform but to entertain. These debates are akin to putting two bears in a cage while we watch, popcorn at hand, to see which draws the most blood. This has nothing to do with governance.

In a debate, I expect to witness an honest exchange of ideas and positions on topics that are important for society to consider. It is my hope that I would learn something in the process. Far too often, that has not been the case over the last several years. The issue of honesty, or lack thereof, has devalued the entire process.

If the purpose for a debate is to enable an honest exchange of viewpoints, how can that occur without honesty? We, as citizens, depend on the integrity of the individuals involved during the debate to be truthful – to base their statements or arguments on facts. Absent truth, you are left with propaganda or worse, intentional effort to deceive.

The lack of integrity in a debate is a telling sign. It foreshadows how a person will conduct themselves because integrity is not something you turn off and on at will. It is part of your character.

Knowing this, I am puzzled as to why anyone would choose to debate a liar. That lack of integrity debases the entire process and disrespects the people it is supposed to inform. All participants are tainted when they enable a platform that so disregards truth and integrity. How do you honestly debate a liar and why would you?

I will no longer lend my attention to these medieval jousts and look forward to a time when fact checking is not my automatic response for those who wish to lead us.

*****

Kevin Deeny