Keep talking

This has not been a good year for peace, on any level. Internationally, sectarian violence and casualties in Iraq have surged; genocide continues unhindered and largely unnoticed in Darfur; Israel attacked Lebanon, leaving thousands of unexploded bombs; and the Iranian president announced that Israel should be wiped from the face of the earth.

Nationally, a deeply polarized nation suffered another close election, for which the campaigns exhibited an unprecedented level of vitriol, vindictiveness and negativity.

Even locally we are not exempt. Sometimes it seems that the worse the messes we get ourselves into, the more internal fighting and bickering there is. That may be happening now in the Sullivan West Central School District, and given the magnitude of the mess we have indeed gotten ourselves into, it is something we can ill afford.

But the way to stop bickering—whether between Sunnis and Shiites, Republicans and Democrats, or local residents of differing opinions—can’t just be to tell people who have complaints to shut up. The one absolute sine qua non of peace is communication. It is when communication stops that fighting begins, whether physically or verbally. And while indulging in an orgy of blame is certainly one way to stop a conversation, to respond to criticism by telling critics that assigning blame makes them bad is not necessarily any better.

The reason is that blame has two components. One is to declare somebody to be in the wrong, frequently accompanied by a desire that they should be punished; but the other is to point out that some given problem was created in whole or in part by some person or persons, and that they should be held accountable. The former, in and of itself, is a useless spinning of wheels that does nothing but generate bad feeling. But the latter is an absolutely essential element in determining what went wrong when a mess is created, and making sure that something like it doesn’t happen again.

Earlier this year, an audit report from the New York State Comptroller’s office stated that Sullivan West Central School District “mismanaged the merger and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars” and “allowed taxpayers to think that… state funding would cover 95 percent of the costs of the District’s projects.”

This means a couple of things. It means, for instance, that voters must insist on clear and accurate communication, and make that a key criterion in their choice of board members. It also means that we need to determine whether there are any individuals in positions of public accountability who made poor judgments, or failed to communicate effectively, and whether they acknowledge their mistakes and are willing and able to do what is necessary to avoid them in the future. If not, then voters have to see to it that they are removed from those positions. It looks like that’s what happened, nationally, in the November elections, and it may well have played a role in what happened locally in the earlier school board elections.

But insisting on accountability is one thing and personal acrimony is another. There is nothing wrong with bringing facts to our attention that help voters to make valid judgments on matters yet to be determined—indeed, it is essential that anybody in possession of such facts make them public. But a mere exchange of personal insults accomplishes nothing.

In order to solve the Sullivan West financial fiasco we must continue talking. That talk should and must include facts, even when they show some people in a bad light. But if it becomes mere repetition of the awfulness of some other guy or guys who made a mistake, it will shut the conversation down. Maybe they did screw up; but it is now we, each and every one of us, who are responsible. Equally, we must be willing to listen to complaints or criticisms, and evaluate them for their accuracy, not for whether they are pleasant to hear. If we can concentrate our criticisms on things that can still be changed, be willing to listen to criticism, and then focus on what concrete steps can be taken next, maybe we can dig ourselves out of the hole together.


Also in this issue:




Conversation stoppers
DO you think blaming, or silencing critics, or something else is the biggest conversation stopper?

Blaming
Silencing critics
Both equally
Something else

by CgiScripts.Net


Dr. Punnybone



Beat Nick

Letters to the Editor

[EDITOR'S NOTE: The River Reporter welcomes letters on all subjects from its readers. They must be signed and include the correspondent's phone number. The correspondent's name and town will appear at the bottom of each letter; titles and affiliations will not, unless the correspondent is writing on behalf of a group.

Letters are printed at the discretion of the editor. It is requested they be limited to 300 words; correspondents may be asked to cut longer letters. Deadline is 1:00 p.m. on Monday.

Letters can be sent by e-mail to editor@riverreporter.com]


Who’s the Grinch?

To the editor:

Lisa Lander, in her December 7 letter attacking me in The River Reporter, apparently could not defend the atrocious record of her husband, incumbent Sullivan West school board member Rick Lander, on the Sullivan West school board.

Mrs. Lander instead refers to me as “the Grinch that is not trying to steal Christmas from us, but a promising future for our students and generations to come.”

I don’t know what dreamland Lisa Lander is living in, but the real Grinch who contributed to the destabilization of the Sullivan West Central School District and the closing of our two essential community elementary schools is her own husband, Rick Lander.

The facts speak for themselves. Rick Lander never bothered to check the declining enrollment figures that demonstrated the Sullivan West merger was doomed to failure.

(continue)