As I read Bruce Poliquin’s column last week, “We must protect sacred right to vote, freely and fairly” (March 13, Page A9), I found myself growing frustrated and irritated. It wasn’t as much the opinion he gave, as the words he chose.
Our national dialogue, which is often guided by our elected leaders, has been increasingly marked by divisive language. Mr. Poliquin, writing about the proposed HR 1 bill, references “far left” voting reformers and the “liberal majority” in Congress. He goes on to write about the “extreme liberal lawmakers in Augusta,” and the “far left Congress in Washington.” He comments on the support given the bill by “liberal Maine Reps. Chellie Pingree and Jared Golden.”
Later in his op-ed he uses the term “common-sense Mainers” to describe opponents of the bill. It is as if there are only two camps: the common-sense Mainers and the radicals. He describes the 2020 election as “chaotic” when many government officials who oversee elections declared it “the most secure in American history.” That the election was “chaotic” was his opinion but not a fact.
Words really do matter. The more we use divisive language, the more we are divided as a nation. The reality is that most of us are closer to the middle. We have words like “extreme” and “radical” for a reason. They describe those very thin margins – of thinking, actions or emotion. When we inject these adjectives into everyday discourse, it tricks our brains into thinking we are more divided than we are.
Chris Taylor
Scarborough
Send questions/comments to the editors.
