"Ac-cent-tchu-ate the positive, ee-lim-in-ate the negative."

By: Jeff McLaren

ABSTRACT:
Unpublished opinion piece on good and bad negativity

Written 75 years ago, Johnny Mercer’s lyrics have made their way into the Great American Songbook and been recorded by Bing Crosby, Ella Fitzgerald,  Aretha Franklin, Paul McCartney, and many others. The song was even featured in a funeral on the British soap opera Coronation Street. But upbeat though those sentiments might be, they overlook the potential for some types of “negativity” to be a positive force in society.

 

If that sounds paradoxical, consider some of the issues that arise in political deliberations. A case in point would be the tensions surrounding the availability and affordability of rental accommodation in Kingston. With a 0.6 per cent vacancy rate, Kingston is possibly the most daunting place in Ontario to find an apartment.

 

Addressing the housing problem requires critical thinking and forthright questioning of the status quo, which can offend the sensibilities of some, and can threaten the profits of those who stand to benefit from a crisis or unjust situation. But if contentious issues are to be resolved, they must be tackled head-on. 

 

Criticism is a word often associated with negativity. Critical thinking, however, involves seeking a deeper understanding of an issue, then contributing to a fulsome discussion in the public sphere. “Good" negativity calls attention to injustice, and is a vital first step in solving problems that arise in the governance of the city. This form of negativity contributes to the betterment of the community.

 

Then there is “bad” negativity: groupthink, personal attacks, malicious misrepresentations, and refusing to listen or engage. Rather than finding solutions to problems, these approaches waste time, narrow people’s thinking, and pave the way to repeating past errors. More insidious, though, is the tendency for these negative approaches to undermine a vibrant democracy by promoting censorship, untruth, and disengagement.

 

The Whig-Standard recently published an opinion piece I wrote about Kingston's rental-housing shortage — a problem exacerbated by the reliance of post-secondary institutions on the private market to accommodate ever-increasing numbers of foreign students. While Canadian arts and science students at Queen’s paid between $7900 to $19000 in tuition fees for the current school year, international students paid $42000 to $47000, and there is seemingly no limit on enrolment in the latter category, while there is for domestic students. For pointing this out, I was subjected to insinuations of racism and labeled a bigot — though I was clearly referring to numbers, not nationalities.

 

As a city councillor, I am used to the thrust and parry of politics, but personal attacks ignore the ideas being argued, and rely instead on attempting to discredit the individual. Such attacks focus on irrelevancies and an animosity towards the person, while failing to analyze the argument itself.

 

Misrepresentations switch the real idea for a similar sounding, but false and dubious idea. Done innocently, it represents a failure to listen, read, and/or understand correctly; done deliberately, it is meant to silence the original idea. I was falsely accused of blaming students, and in particular international students, for the housing crisis. Most readers saw through this, but some in respected positions misrepresented my ideas.

 

Refusing to engage is another form of “bad" negativity. Using one’s position of influence or authority to label an idea as wrong, without any evidence or consideration, is ignoring an opportunity to see a wider range of solutions. Because the world is always changing, narrow thinking -- limited to existing norms -- is neither progressive nor helpful in finding the best solutions. No one has all the answers; however, when an answer is proposed but not considered, we artificially limit the possibilities and best outcomes.

 

Discerning the difference between good and bad negativity in political deliberations will influence how politics shapes our city. Do we want the extreme polarity of Donald Trump's world, where engaging in character assassination takes precedence over finding better ways forward, or do we want to come together as people of good will, who must face a huge number of threats to the well-being of our community? 

 

Added on: 2019-03-23 07:21:21