How to debate tough issues without hatred or bleeding

Our politics is broken. If you’ve read any news in the past few years, you’ve likely come to the same conclusion.

In the last election, we had one candidate calling a vast chunk of American voters “deplorable” while the other chanted “lock her up.”

Congress has proved incapable of improving health care, the byzantine tax system or doomed entitlement programs. They can’t even agree on the definition of “improvement.”

Both parties have learned that little unites their base other than hatred for the other team. Thus, the candidate with the angriest rhetoric is rewarded with public office. And the vicious circle spins even faster.

No longer satisfied with the boring ballot box, the political anger poured into the streets. From Berkeley to Charlottesville to Boston, citizens vent their fury in hand-to-hand combat with deadly results. Our discourse is more like a donnybrook, and those interested in actual solutions are ignored on the sidelines.

Civility and compromise are dirty words these days, but there are some people wanting to restore a bit of dignity to the public square. A place where important issues can be calmly discussed rather than shouted down.

Carlos Alfaro sees a better way. “We’re just talking past each other and not able to understand what motivates the other side.”

To change this dynamic, Alfaro and his friend Kevin Calabrese founded Arizona Talks.

Over the summer, the organization held events with experts and activists who rarely share the same stage. Instead of letting the two sides fire salvos at each other, the unique format encourages participants to discover common ground and look for solutions.

Earlier this month, they held a forum on education where I had the opportunity to share my experience as a parent of kids who have attended (and enjoyed) both traditional public schools and charters.

After a few other personal stories, azcentral’s Alia Rau and Expect More Arizona’s Geoffrey Esposito discussed the facts surrounding our state’s education-

al system and the heated debate over Empowerment Savings Accounts.

The event ended with a civil, hourlong discussion between two ESA proponents and two ESA critics.

As it turned out, everyone on stage wanted the best education for kids, but merely disagreed on the best way to go about it. There was no profanity, slurs or fist fights. And while audience members signaled their approval and disapproval, no protesters jumped the stage. There wasn’t a “boo” to be heard.

Despite the polarizing rhetoric surrounding the school choice debate, several hundred activists in the thick of it got along great. By evening’s end, we didn’t see each other so much as political enemies, but fellow Arizonans.

“Our goal is simple,” Alfaro told me. “Getting one group of people together with the other group of people who disagree.”

“We get a demonized view of the other side,” he added, “Of people who live in your community who go you your schools. We just get into our teams.”

Arizona Talks stepped in to break the partisan divide and create dialogue between communities of all viewpoints and backgrounds.

Also, by starting the event with a few personal testimonials and a calm breakdown of the issues, the debate section didn’t devolve into the slugfests we’ve seen at recent town halls.

“We were initially very worried getting these different teams together,” Alfaro said, “but the speakers were respectful to each other as well as to the audience members.” Showing the hunger for calm discussion, the event’s hashtag even trended on Twitter.

There are solutions out there. Arizona Talks is one of them.

Jon Gabriel, a Mesa resident, is editor-in-chief of Ricochet.com and a contributor to The Republic and azcentral .com. Follow him on Twitter at @exjon.