Anything related to elected offices in the United States is rooted in conflict.
During the campaign season, candidates running for office share their ideas and beliefs and argue over whose is best and who would help the community the most. Sometimes it can get ugly.
Once in office, that person must work with others to navigate the path toward agreement or compromise. Sometimes it’s easy and sometimes it is much more difficult. Ultimately, our system is based on the belief that this competition of ideas will lead to the best outcome for the most people possible.
Unfortunately, the healthy dispute over ideas - for instance, rational and substantive discussion about policy issues - has degraded into disdain for those who hold office.
Disdain involves a strong feeling of contempt or scorn directed at others solely because of their beliefs or political affiliations. It takes what was, or could be a healthy debate and discussion and turns it into an expression of hostility for those who hold differing views.
Disdain involves personal attacks. Disdain does not move anything forward in a positive way.
Most notably in my current situation, a local community Facebook page has chosen a path where they presented a video with several accusations and innuendo. When shown evidence that those accusations are not true, they have decided now is the time to perform their “due diligence” and continue to keep that video on their page in its original form.
Before posting the video, they never attempted to reach out to me to confirm that I accepted the donation and cashed the check. Instead, they saw an opportunity to craft an untruthful narrative for political reasons.
Their original intent of the video had the strongest form of disdain baked into it.
This video isn't one regarding a policy difference. This video’s sole purpose was a personal attack.
On their own Facebook page, they describe themselves as being “… committed to being a trusted source of information in order to bring about meaningful and lasting change.”
How do they think they can be a “trusted source of information” when they post a video containing false information and continue to keep it up after being presented with factual information to the contrary?
It’s ironic that one of the slides mentions that “The Germantown School Board lacks public trust for a reason” and yet, the video should make you question your level of trust in this page since they have been shown that some of the information they share can be proved to be false.
I’ve had a couple of people reach out and ask me about why I’m pressing this issue so much. Some probably believe that it's not worth my time to give as much effort as I am to this specific issue.
If this was over a simple policy issue, I wouldn’t engage via Facebook. I would continue to maintain my position and those (anonymous) folks have methods like their Facebook posts, email, public comment, and other ways to share their opinions. They are entitled to them.
However, they are not entitled to share lies and defamatory information. I’m entitled to defend myself in just as public way as they have chosen.
And I will continue to do so…
For the full and truthful details behind all of this, please visit www.tracypawlak.com/post/response.
The view shared above is my own personal opinion and does not represent the views of the Germantown School Board or the District.
Comments