Dinner is the only time at home when my whole family can sit together. Despite their preoccupation with work and their social lives for the rest of the week, my parents and both my sisters come home by 9:00 PM sharp every night so that we might end the day together. Our cozy routine continues from there with banter and eager feasting framing all dinner conversations and their inevitable turn towards the discussion of politics. Dinner has, undoubtedly, become the worst time to be at my house.
My family represents each inch of the political compass, and therefore, none of them can stand being anything less than true north. Squabbling and squawking to put markets to shame, my family only ceases their dinnertime arguments when I might venture an opinion. Incredulously, they’d all turn to me: “What could you know about any of it?”
For this reason, I’ve learned to bite my tongue numb and still at the dining table. I’m expected to recount the day’s work and mumble thanks to God for the food on my plate—otherwise, not a breath must pass my lips. The adults are talking.
I don’t believe my political hesitation is unique, nor is my family distinctly harsh in rejecting me from their discussions. I’d even argue that everyone in my generation has felt infantilized when trying to engage in social concerns.
However, it is important to take care not to correlate older age with graver disrespect for youthful engagements in politics. In fact, living in an age of social media has also made us familiar with peers calling us out for our socio-political stances.
Instead, the hostile portrayal and practice of political conversations are what make social engagement difficult, especially for the youth. As Filipinos, we must actively welcome the youth into conversations about developing the country.
On this note, we must challenge the notion of “civility” that is encouraged when discussing politics. The social norm of “civil conversation” is nothing more than parties accommodating the first strongly worded political opinion despite clear disagreement. The exchange of ideas festers into neutral statements and stances, and no meaningful progress or synthesis is achieved.
Truly civil discussions must be urged back to the errand of civility: To socially engage, dialogue, and form new ideas. We must perpetuate the idea that disagreement is the very soul of political discussions, for in this conflict we might find the potential to intersect and learn from one another.
What remains for my peers and I who are shut out of mealtime politics is to converse wherever we may about the country’s progress. We may not find our seats at the long tables overnight, but we cannot afford to lose our ideas and voices over the whine of screeching forks and raised voices during dinner.
