Try free for 30 days

  • Quarterly Essay 87: Uncivil Wars

  • How Contempt Is Corroding Democracy
  • By: Waleed Aly, Scott Stephens
  • Narrated by: Scott Stephens
  • Length: 2 hrs and 50 mins
  • 4.4 out of 5 stars (121 ratings)

A 30-day trial plus your first audiobook free.
1 credit/month after trial—to buy any title you like, yours to keep.
Listen all you want to a selection of thousands of Audible Originals, audiobooks and podcasts.
$16.45 a month after 30 day trial. Cancel anytime.
Quarterly Essay 87: Uncivil Wars cover art

Quarterly Essay 87: Uncivil Wars

By: Waleed Aly, Scott Stephens
Narrated by: Scott Stephens
Free with 30-day trial

$16.45/month after 30 days. Cancel anytime.

Buy Now for $14.95

Buy Now for $14.95

Pay using voucher balance (if applicable) then card ending in
By confirming your purchase, you agree to Audible's Conditions Of Use and Privacy Notice and authorise Audible to charge your designated credit card or another available credit card on file.

Publisher's Summary

Is our democracy corroding? In this eloquent original essay, Waleed Aly and Scott Stephens explore the ethics and politics of public debate—and the threat it now faces.

In a healthy society we need the capacity to disagree. Yet Aly and Stephens note a growing tendency to disdain and dismiss opponents, to treat them with contempt. This toxic partisanship has been imported from the United States, where it has been a temptation for both left and right. Aly and Stephens discuss some telling examples, analyse the role of the media, and look back to heroes of democracy who found a better way forward.

Arguing that democracy cannot survive contempt, they draw on philosophy, literature and history to make an urgent case about the present.

‘So what do we owe those with whom we might profoundly, even radically, disagree? In our time, the answer increasingly seems to be: Nothing. Absolutely nothing. We've come to regard our opponents as not much more than obstructions in the road, impediments standing between us and our desired end. We have grown disinclined to consider what it might mean to go on together meaningfully as partners within a shared democratic project. To put it bluntly, we see no future with our political opponents because we feel we have nothing to learn from them.’ (Waleed Aly & Scott Stephens, Uncivil Wars)

Waleed Aly is a writer, academic, lawyer and broadcaster. He is a lecturer in politics at Monash University and a co-host of Network Ten’s The Project. He is the author of People Like Us and Quarterly Essay 37: What’s Right? With Scott Stephens, he co-hosts Radio National’s The Minefield program.

Scott Stephens is the online editor of Religion and Ethics for the ABC. He has been a lecturer in theology and ethics, and is editor of several books.

©2022 Waleed Aly and Scott Stephens (P)2022 Audible Australia Pty Ltd.

More from the same

Author

What listeners say about Quarterly Essay 87: Uncivil Wars

Average Customer Ratings
Overall
  • 4.5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 Stars
    76
  • 4 Stars
    28
  • 3 Stars
    7
  • 2 Stars
    7
  • 1 Stars
    3
Performance
  • 4.5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 Stars
    66
  • 4 Stars
    26
  • 3 Stars
    6
  • 2 Stars
    2
  • 1 Stars
    2
Story
  • 4.5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 Stars
    62
  • 4 Stars
    26
  • 3 Stars
    6
  • 2 Stars
    5
  • 1 Stars
    4

Reviews - Please select the tabs below to change the source of reviews.

Sort by:
Filter by:
  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

A must read to save our Democracy

I felt both validated by having a different opinion about some generally held views and humiliated by my ignorance about how democracy works and can be lost by hostile feelings towards people who have a different opinion to my own. Scary prospect. Brilliant analysis.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

Rings true, but...

A bit idealistic, in that this will be read by those who still believe in democracy, and not those trying to overturn elections!

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

Insightful and thought-provoking

This is a beautifully written and performed essay that explores some of the problems with public debate in Australia and the world. It help me put my finger on what had been perturbing me. Brilliant.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    3 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    1 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    3 out of 5 stars

Repetition in desperate need of an edit!

My god! if anything could have been a 45 minutes discussion - an hour at most - this would have been it. The same point is hammered home again and again as we stray from the point and slowly make our way back.
In general I find Waleed Ali's work on the ABC very insightful, but this overly dramatic narration by the co-author is exhausting and patronising to listen to.
There's some interesting pieces of history. but they are common knowledge, meanwhile we're told how to analyse recent history. I know, I was there, and don't need to see it through your lens. Using something as an example is one thing, and contextually is great, but having someone with a condescending teacher-like style prattle on as if we're eight years old is not enjoyable.
Maybe this would have been better with Waleed's style, maybe this would have been better with a one hour time limit, but really this is disappointing, especially considering both of them work in radio, and (having done so myself for over 20+ years), there's a time limit for everything. You also have to sell the point, keep the audience engaged and have something interesting to say - unfortunately this piece has none of those key attributes.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

A very important listen and a serious warning.

As the world continues to divide itself into two sides, is there any hope of a return to reason and working together?
This program examines how society has embraced and accepted contempt as a means through social media and the mass media.
It’s a fascinating at a possibly very scary future where people don’t compromise but instead go to conflict over their views and see the opposite side as “the evil one to be destroyed”.
Give this a listen, I think you’ll agree afterwards we all need to try and do better for each other instead of hating each other.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

Irgent refections on ethics, contempt, and democracy

In "Uncivil Wars," Waleed Aly and Scott Stephens delve into the degradation of public discourse, arguing that democracy is at risk from growing contempt. They examine the tendency to dismiss and disdain opponents, a toxic partisanship they suggest has been adopted from the US. Through examples, media analysis, and historical reflection, they advocate for a democracy that learns from its adversaries, warning that without this, democracy cannot endure. Despite its thought-provoking nature, some critics find the essay's focus on contempt as the core issue to be overly simplistic, given the complex and severe threats to democracy

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars

Mmmmmmm

Read more Jane Austin to me Scott, so sultry, much passion.
Yeah the rest was good too.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    4 out of 5 stars

Engaging content, excellent narration

Stephens is articulate and engaging in his narration.

The categorisation of 3 (overlapping) kinds of contempt seems a little awkward to my mind - but it did work successfully as a vehicle for presenting and differentiating some of the concepts in the essay. The argument regarding "the air" in which we see contempt arise in today's social settings, and why this is relevant with regard to the validity (or non-validity) of contempt, is particularly insightful.

While defining contempt, Aly and Stephens write:
"... contempt by it's very nature marks the end of a conversation. It's a full stop."

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    5 out of 5 stars

Excellent

A distillation of the main recurring theme Scott and Waleed’s brilliant podcast. Beautifully written and well argued.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

  • Overall
    1 out of 5 stars
  • Performance
    1 out of 5 stars
  • Story
    1 out of 5 stars

Politically charged crybabies

This is anti-labor drivel camouflaged as an appeal to end "contempt" in political discourse. Note that the lukewarm acknowledgement of LNP mistakes is overshadowed by repeated attacks on public broadcasters and the ALP. Did Murdoch pay for this?

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

In the spirit of reconciliation, Audible acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.