PERSPECTIVE Democratic Expeditions Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility Christian Golden and Peter Verpoorten The Problem of Civility Lost Civility Appeals to civility may seem quaint and old-fashioned in our moment of democratic crisis. Many on the left see it as unacceptably conservative, a regressive tool of“respectability politics”(Cherry 2021; Eltahawy 2019). Simi larly, those in the far-right,“post-liberal” Catholic movement known as“Integralism” describe civility as a mis guided obstacle to the power politics they practise (Ahmari 2019). Meanwhile, right-wing authoritarians like Donald Trump replace civil rhetoric with threats to use state power to punish rivals and persecute critics, whom Trump describes as the“enemy from within”(Hubbard, Rosen, and Huey-Burns 2024). Presumably, gestures of unity and tolerance have no place in such apocalyptic politics. Is civility obsolete? On the contrary, we believe it’s a vital resource for civic renewal in challenged democracies. Polarisation and Conflict Today’s growing partisan divides threaten democracies. As they become more rigidly polarised, citizens’ trust in government and each other erodes(Schedler 2023). As a result, communication between opposing groups breaks down, normalising chronic conflict and dysfunction and increasing the likelihood of violence. This process reinforces partisan identity, which increasingly dominates how citizens understand every aspect of their lives, from religion to lifestyle choices. Such political“mega-identi ties” stifle civility and dialogue(Levendusky 2023, 30) and even undermine like-minded political movements through internal division and gridlock(Talisse 2021). When everything is politicised, compromise between and within groups is perceived as capitulation to the enemy. Unlike“adversaries,”“enemies” no longer see each other as legitimate opponents. Politics comes to be seen as war by other means. What seems needed, then, are“partisan strategies that cut across social identities” in order“to avoid the tribal lock-in that makes partisan identity such an anti-democratic force”(Ruckelhaus 2022). Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility 1

Reimagining Civility Civility can help redress the crisis of polarisation. It can serve as an antidote to the paralysing monopoly of partisan identity and help to reinvigorate democratic culture:“the key to the establishment of stable political institutions lies in civil society, and specifically in the presence of a‘civic culture’ in local communi ties”(Sakwa 2012). So, what exactly is civility? By being civil, citizens express their commitment to de mocracy as a valuable way of life and not only as a sys tem of government. Civil citizens don’t always agree, nor are they always pleasant or courteous. But they share an aspiration to live and work together as equals in a free society despite their many differences, even when it’s difficult. The main purpose of civility is to sustain relationships among citizens that leave room for the possibility of change. Such relationships make effective communica tion and compromise possible. Citizens who value them therefore refrain from treating their differences as being absolute or set in stone. Those who practise civility may still see and treat each other as competitors. What makes them civil is their commitment to seeing and treating each other as co-creators of a shared, undecided future. This creates strong reasons to tolerate challenges to one’s views or values that might otherwise provoke uncivil responses. In contrast, the essence of incivility is the refusal to treat someone as capable of being or acting differently. To treat another as lacking the capacity for change is to deny that they qualify as a whole person, as someone who is never hopelessly defined by their past actions or by the perceptions of others. Practical Steps In deeply divided societies, some of the best practices of civility involve cross-cutting strategies for building connections, especially between political opponents, that bring them back into relationship with each other. Relational Organising Effective civic action often seeks to build and leverage strong relationships across citizens’ differences. One example is a style of grassroots activism called“relatio nal organising,” or peer-to-peer,“word-of-mouth acti vism”(IGNITE National 2022). It is a method for mobili sing voters, recruiting donors, and activating volunteers. Relational organisers use existing communication chan nels to grow a movement by nurturing connections bet ween its supporters and their fellow community mem bers(NAACP 2020). Such techniques demonstrate the centrality of relation ships to democratic life. But relational organising tends to focus on forging connections among like-minded people. Civility draws on many of the techniques of rela tional organising, such as deep and active listening (LWV 2020), but widens the lens. It seeks to build relati onships not just among like-minded citizens but across political divides. Research shows this to be feasible even in deeply polarised societies(Levendusky 2023). Co-operatives The value of civility is also illustrated by the co-operative movement of nineteenth-century socialist workers. Consider the Belgian socialist co-operative“Vooruit” (Forward), which began in 1881 as a co-operative bake ry. Through shrewd financial management, the co-ope rative expanded its activities to include a health fair, clothing stores, and pharmacies. In its heyday before the economic crisis of the 1930s, the co-operative offe red its members maternity allowance and supplemen tary pensions. This cross-cutting strategy helped mobilise impoverished Belgian workers to defend themselves against the dominant Catholic party that effectively demonised the workers’ movement through the church. The co-operati ve’s services cut across entrenched divisions between “good Catholics” and“unbelievers.” Such initiatives address the populist complaint that“eli tes don’t show up here or care about us.” They restore the kind of interpersonal contact across partisan identities that invites engagement and fosters empathy. Co-operative Service Centres Today’s challenged democracies could benefit from a si milar approach. Pro-democracy organisations could establish co-operative service centres dedicated to meeting the concrete needs of those who are vulnerable to partisan or populist radicalisation in underserved areas. For example, through a network of health care services, co-operatives could provide members with medical check-ups, health consultations, or access to prescription drugs at reduced, affordable prices. Another need that these centres could focus on is food, which is especially important in so-called“food de serts.” Co-op members could be offered quality baked goods, fresh fruits and vegetables, and access to nutrition information and cooking classes. Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility 2

Such community outreach could create conditions for civility by restoring contact between members of poli tically opposing groups, thereby undercutting the corrosive politics of enmity on which authoritarian move ments rely. Such outreach efforts would extend civility across the differences that exist in the communities served. The emphasis would fall on preserving the possibilities of ongoing relationships between citizens seen as whole persons, based on the hope of future partnership. Restarting Conversation Two case studies dramatise the ethical spirit of these interventions. Case 1: Daryl Davis Daryl Davis is a Black American musician who has spent decades building personal relationships with members of the Ku Klux Klan, a notorious white supre macist organisation with deep and violent roots in postCivil War American history(Brown 2017). For thirty-five years, Davis has used the tools of persuasion through respectful, often intense dialogue to convince hundreds of Klansmen to leave the insular hate group. Davis proudly owns more than two hundred hooded white robes, the Klan’s ceremonial garb, which former members have surrendered to him as a token of respect. Davis models civility and its limits, too. He is an avo wed non-pacifist cautiously prepared to defend himself against possible physical harm. And he’s hardly open to being convinced that his interlocutors’ racist views are sound. What makes him civil is his openness to changing his mind about his interlocutors and about his relationship with them. By demonstrating to his interlo cutors that he sees them as capable of being something other than his enemies, he invites them to take the same risk. Davis’s case is extraordinary. Most opportunities for ci vility in non-violent social situations do not involve such extreme risks or rewards. But his successful record reminds us that democracy as a way of life is an ever yday possibility, and that practising civility means seeking relationships of equality across deep differences. Case 2: Hand in Hand Hand in Hand is a bilingual Arabic-Hebrew school loca ted in Jerusalem(Beardsley 2024). Its multicultural cur riculum brings Jewish and Arab students together to share knowledge and experiences in defiance of the strict separation between Jews and Arabs typical within Israeli society. The forms of intergroup contact practi sed at Hand in Hand are those that have proven effecti ve in breaking down stereotypes and reducing prejudice in many other contexts(McLeod 2023). Hand in Hand’s approach to education embodies the spirit of civility by building relationships of mutual concern across dangerous divides through active habits of careful listening and learning. Competing cultural stories and identities are brought into conversation with one another. Through face-to-face dialogue, students learn that stories other than their own are believable, and that rewarding relationships with those who are different are possible. The school’s Principal proclaims, “We’re strengthening shared values, the possibility of a different life.” This is the essence of civility. Conclusion Polarisation encourages and rewards incivility, which in turn undermines democratic practices, values, and institutions. Its corrosive effects can therefore be reduced by strengthening the habits of civility. The strategy we pro pose builds relationships across partisan divides both by using institutions and by challenging citizens to listen and learn across their differing views and values. Relationship-oriented activism, labour movements, and everyday examples of intergroup contact offer inspiring and effective models for promoting democracy through civility in action. Habits and Practices of Civility → Deep and active listening across differences → Treating perceived differences as changeable(not set in stone) → Tolerating or welcoming challenges to one’s politi cal position or perspective → Bringing contrasting stories and identities into open conversation → Valuing opportunities to build relationships across differences over opportunities to defeat, sideline, or silence dissenting voices Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility 3

Bibliography Ahmari, Sohrab. 2019.“Against David French-ism.” First Things, May 29. https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/ against-david-french-ism. Beardsley, Eleanor. 2024.“A School in Jerusalem Brings Arab and Jewish Kids Together to Boost Understanding.” NPR, January 23. https://www.npr.org/2024/01/23/1221957556/israel-schools-arabsjews-gaza-war#:~:text=Hand%20in%20Hand%20is%20one,says%20 it%20is%20not%20mandatory. Brown, Dwane. 2017.“How One Man Convinced 200 Ku Klux Klan Members To Give Up Their Robes.” NPR, August 20. https://www. npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-kuklux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes. Cherry, Myisha. 2021.“How Rage Can Battle Racism.” The Atlantic, October 17. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ve/2021/10/myisha-cherry-rage-antiracism/620381/. Eltahawy, Mona. 2019.“Civility Will Not Overturn the Patriarchy: One Man’s Manners Are Another Woman’s Oppression.” Lithub, September 19. https://lithub.com/mona-eltahawy-civility-will-notoverturn-the-patriarchy/. Hubbard, Kaia, Jacob Rosen, and Caitlin Huey-Burns. 2024. “Trump’s anti-immigrant, domestic‘enemy’ rhetoric, in focus in final stretch to Election Day.” CBS News, October 14. https://www. cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-rhetoric-enemy-anti-immigrant/. IGNITE National. 2022.“Relational Organizing Online 101.” February 12. https://ignitenational.org/blog/relational-organizingonline-101. League of Women Voters(LWV). 2020.“FAQ: The Power of Relational Organizing.” April. https://www.lwv.org/sites/default/ files/2020-04/FAQ%20The%20Power%20of%20Relational%20 Organizing.pdf. Levendusky, Matthew. 2023. Our Common Bonds: Using What Americans Share to Help Bridge the Partisan Divide. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. McLeod, Saul. 2023.“Allport’s Intergroup Contact Hypothesis: Its History and Influence.” Simply Psychology, June 15. https://www. simplypsychology.org/contact-hypothesis.html. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). 2020.“How to Be a Relational Organizer.” The Crisis, March 2. https://naacp.org/articles/how-be-relational-organizer. Ruckelshaus, Jay. 2022.“What Kind of Identity is Partisan Identi ty?‘Social’ versus‘Political’ Partisanship in Divided Democracies.” American Political Science Review 116(4): 1477-1489. doi:10.1017/ S0003055422000211. Sakwa, Richard. 2012.“Democratization.” In The Routledge Handbook of Russian Politics and Society, edited by Graeme Gill and James Young, 33–44. London: Routledge. Schedler, Andreas. 2023.“Rethinking Political Polarization.” Political Science Quarterly 138(3): 335–360. https://academic.oup.com/ psq/article/138/3/335/7192890. Talisse, Robert B. 2021. Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side. New York: Oxford University Press. Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility 4

About the Authors Dr. Christian Golden is a Lecturer in Philosophy at Georgetown Uni versity whose research examines the shape and limits of agency and the place and value of conflict in public and private life. His current work explores the confluence of citizenship and commitment by investigating virtues like integrity, humility, and civility. It aims to develop a model of democratic engagement that tempers polarization by enabling the nonviolent transformation of civic relationships across volatile differences. His love of teaching has led him to volunteer in nontraditional spaces like Jessup Correctional Institution in Jessup, Maryland, and at the Oak Ridge Institute for Continued Learning at Roane State Community College in Harriman, Tennessee. He was awarded Georgetown’s 2020 Tropaia Outstanding Faculty Award for the Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Studies Program. E-Mail: cmg53@georgetown.edu About“Democratic Expeditions” This essay is based on the paper presented by the author at the workshop Moral Dilemmas of Resistance: Political Ethics in the Face of Democratic Regression and Electoral Authoritarianism. Convened by Zoltan Miklosi and Attila Mráz, the workshop took place at the CEU Democracy Institute in Budapest on 27 and 28 September 2024. It was the inaugural event of Democratic Expeditions, a series of openly sourced, carefully crafted international research workshops that shed light on underexplored issues of democratic crises and democratizing struggles. The initiative is a joint venture of the Regional Office of the Friedrich Ebert Founda tion on Democracy of the Future in Vienna, the CEU Democracy Institute, and the CEU Department of Political Science. Peter Verpoorten is a doctoral student in Political Theory at Central European University’s Doctoral School of Political Science. After stu dying Law at KU Leuven, he started working as a criminal defense attorney in 2004, specializing in mental illness and human rights cases. He is a partner at Verhaegen, Verpoorten& Segers Lawyers in Belgium, where he lives with his family. As a working student, Peter studied Political Science at KU Leuven. His 2023 master’s dissertation was titled The party ban as a restriction on the actions of a political party as an actor in a democracy. Peter then moved to CEU to work on his PhD on the rethinking of Militant Democracy. His research in terests include democratic resilience and democratic backsliding; aut horitarian politics; democratic defensive ethics; resistance, terrorism and civil war; humanitarian intervention and just war. E-Mail: verpoorten_peter@phd.ceu.edu Imprint Published by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung e.V. Godesberger Allee 149 53175 Bonn, Germany info@fes.de Issuing Department FES Regional Office for International Cooperation Democracy of the Future Reichsratsstr. 13/5 A-1010 Vienna Contact Filip Milačić filip.milacic@fes.de Design pertext| www.pertext.de Photo credit Lerone Pieters| Unsplash The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung(FES) or of the organization for which the author works. Commercial use of media published by the FES is not permitted without the written consent of the FES. Publications by the FES may not be used for electioneering purposes. March 2025 © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung e. V. Further publications of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung can be found here: ↗ www.fes.de/publikationen FES Regional Office for International Cooperation Against Polarisation: Reconstructing Civility 5