Event Planning and Business Entertainment in the U.S. Corporate World

A liberal democracy can survive for a while on institutional strength and widespread agreement. As long as most people are generally satisfied with how things are going (or have made peace with the status quo), it is easy to imagine that something like a social contract will keep things on track. Hamish MacAuley makes a persuasive case that many Canadians came of age politically between the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the 2008 financial crisis, when consensus was widespread and politics seemed optional, thus many chose to stay out. We abandoned democratic governing habits during prosperous times. Instead, we played politics.In response, McGill's Jacob T. Levy advocates for political action that rejects the status quo while also refusing to burn it all down or take our ball and go home. We should participate in politics, even if it is unsatisfying.When the foundations of our democratic structure or the rights of vulnerable people are jeopardized, it makes sense to delegate authority to politicians who would not deserve it under normal conditions. It can make sense to join our opponents in condemning someone we believe is clearly the best candidate for power. We should not pretend that there is no drawback to making such a decision; we simply need to determine when the advantages outweigh the costs.We must avoid the temptation to gratify our worst inclinations just because it is so satisfying. Satisfying politics will tell us that a choice is excellent just because it is one we (or someone on our side) made. Instead, we need to take a step back and identify when politics is making things worse. We must distinguish between political opponents and foes. We need to improve our ability to distinguish between politics as an increasingly confrontational and antisocial kind of entertainment and the politics required to address social issues.

Joining a political party is almost certainly 

the incorrect decision. The strongest tribal motivations to band together and wage war on The Other Side come from political voters. And while voting along party lines may not be actively detrimental, it is unlikely to address the root causes of our issues.A better approach is to begin with a personal inventory: how do you participate? Are you working or still playing? Can you explain the various sides of the topics you care about in a way that supporters of each viewpoint would understand? Do you engage in conversations with people with whom you disagree with the intention of creating understanding rather than fact-checking or changing minds? Can you describe specific changes to policies with which you disagree, regardless of political party beliefs or posturing? Do you look for concrete methods to enhance your community? All of these are places where we may begin to strengthen the foundations for less superficial politics.This is not to say that we should all simply accept what appears to be unacceptable. Persuasion is important, yet it is often overlooked in politics. Trying to disgrace, shame, or expel everyone who disagrees with us may be pleasurable, but it does not improve the situation. Persuasion requires a foundation of understanding, whether it is taking the time to comprehend the sentiments and beliefs that underpin stances we disagree with, or simply trying hard to begin with the presumption of goodwill.

This is all labor and will require emotional energy

But laziness and lack of effort are not the issue. Being furious all the time and hunting for someone to fight may be enjoyable, but it is also tiresome.If we continue as we have and settle with pleasant politics, we will fail to hold governments and politicians accountable. We will not have the necessary conversations to foster understanding, rather than pushing potential allies toward radicalization. People with something worthwhile to contribute will just throw up their hands and remain on the sidelines.And if we just settle for what is satisfying, we will be unable to accept the unpleasant truth: that we have dug ourselves so deeply into this hole that there is most likely no clean way out. There isn't a single neat trick for defending liberalism and democracyThings have been worse before, but we have made them better. Our predicament is not insurmountable; it is just difficult. We've cared enough to become outraged for long enough. Now we should be motivated enough to complete the task.

I do not anticipate this essay to change many

people's thoughts. But ideally, the next time you're about to start a battle in the comments or read through your newsfeed, I'll be able to raise some doubts. Pleading with people to perform the real work of politics isn't very satisfying. But if enough of us care enough to be persistent, patient, and kind about what matters, no matter how distant achievement may appear, we can begin to strengthen the foundations of free democracy. That has to start feeling satisfying.

Patrick Luciani, the Hub's resident book critic, tackles Edmund Phelps' My Journeys in Economic Theory, which will be published by Columbia University Press in 2023. Patrick's book reviews appear every two weeks on thehub.ca.If one thing has perplexed Canada's government economists, it is the country's consistently low productivity performance. They complain that we are slow to innovate and spread technology once it is developed. We believed it was only a matter of providing more subsidies and incentives for firms to develop and catch up with the Americans, but things are only getting worse.