Civil discourse, not disruptions

I watched the Wheat Ridge City Council meeting on Monday. In response to antisemitic comments during the previous meeting, pastors and members of the local faith community showed up in force and spoke out against hate and in support of the city council. The turnout was very effective in showing support and had the desired effect of limiting the ability of saboteurs to crowd out civil discourse with provocative and hateful comments. I commend this effort.

Disruptions are not unique to Wheat Ridge, nor are provocative comments limited to antisemitism. In the meeting’s public forum session, a commenter falsely accused Biden officials of dual citizenship with Israel. By weakly disguising this as a concern for “loyalty” to the U.S., the comment relied on falsehoods to induce a leap of faith (dual citizenship = disloyalty), to foment anger at the Biden administration’s Middle East policy, and to “hate” President Joe Biden and the Democrats in general. Antisemitism and anti-government arguments are trendy tools to sow division. The attacks are organized and tactical. Is there any doubt that bad actors like Hamas, Iran, Russia, et al. love seeing us fight amongst ourselves?

Disruptions probe for weaknesses in government/institutional systems and create division where none need exist. Scoundrels have bastardized the First Amendment. But we can limit comments so they pertain to council business, for example. As citizens, we need not default to institutional distrust, which is so prevalent these days. An institution is only as good as the people in it. Vote intelligently, not disruptively. — Mick Domenick, Wheat Ridge