Thank You for Arguing: Chapter 28 Summary & Analysis

Years ago, Heinrichs visited the Italian Riviera and ate dinner with two locals, Gianni and Carlo. Gianni went on a drunken rant about how Americans are fat because they drink too much water, and then began arguing the point with Heinrichs. He wasn’t really trying to persuade, and didn’t even believe what he was saying—and yet, his rhetorical performance was a “bonding experience” for Heinrichs. These days, it’s rare for Americans to argue—in fact, in America “only the rude, the insane, and politicians disagree.” Rhetoric has largely gone out of fashion, partly because classical education faded away in the 19th century. In this final chapter, Heinrichs will show that rhetoric “could help lead us out of our political mess” and that rhetoric has always played a critical role in the functioning of a successful democracy.

Heinrichs likes to relate everything back to the history of rhetoric—a habit which his family finds highly annoying. However, in the case of American history, his habit is justified. Most of the key figures in the American Revolution had been trained in the art of rhetoric. The Founders idolized the Greeks and Romans—among the Founders, praising an orator as a “modern Cicero” was the highest compliment. Furthermore, one of the most popular plays in early Revolutionary society was Cato, in which the ancient Roman Cato declares “give me liberty or give me death”—a line that the Founding Father Patrick Henry later used in his own speeches.

The Founders idolized the ancient Greeks and Romans, but they were also haunted by their mistakes. In particular, the Founders tried to understand why democracy failed in Athens, and why it destroyed the Roman Republic. They believed that factionalism— i.e., conflicts between different groups—bred chaos. So the Founders instituted a system of checks and balances designed to prevent any one faction from becoming too powerful. In the Founders’ system of democracy, a “chosen body of citizens”—citizens who’d been trained in rhetoric—would be responsible for translating public opinion into government policy. Rhetorically gifted citizens were everywhere in early America—in fact, early Harvard and Columbia graduates were required to read Ciceronian orations.

Perhaps the biggest surprise of early American society was that the “chosen body of citizens,” whose stated duty was to oppose factionalism, became the enablers and creators of new factions—namely, political parties. Early parties, such as the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans, claimed to oppose factions, but in fact created a schism in American politics, launching a series of personal attacks and a general “collapse of civility,” and of rhetoric.

In modern times, the schism in American politics probably isn’t as severe as it has been in the past (during the Civil War, for example). Nevertheless, American politics has become more and more “tribal,” to the point where people vote for their party no matter who the candidate is. The tribalism of American politics has destroyed deliberative debate as a means of enacting change. Too often, disagreements become mired in demonstrative rhetoric and the clash between different values. The problem with purely demonstrative arguing is that it’s polarizing. For example, when Democrats declared global warming a “moral issue,” Republicans began denying that climate change of any kind was occurring.

Aristotle argued that virtue is “a matter of character, concerned with choice, lying in a mean.” As values become more polarized, the concept of “lying in a mean” has become rare in American politics. The cure for polarization and tribalism must be deliberative rhetoric, bringing extremes into a “moderate orbit.” Heinrichs argues that America must revive rhetoric and teach its citizens to think in terms of moderation and future-tense decisions. Even now, AP English courses are emphasizing rhetoric, and teachers are including rhetoric in their curricula. If people learned to think and speak rhetorically, then politicians will speak more intelligently and make more of an effort to seem disinterested. People everywhere would “actually start talking—and listening—to one another.”

Heinrichs encourages his readers to “foster the great rhetorical revival.” When talking politics, they should use rhetorical techniques, but also focus on the future and use the language of decisions. Parents should talk to their kids’ teachers about adding rhetoric to the curriculum. As a father, Heinrichs has always encouraged his children to use rhetoric. In doing so, he helped his children see through advertising techniques and become more interested in politics and the news. To this day, Heinrichs’s children’s arguing drives him crazy—but it also makes him proud.