Civility is Expected in Commerce & the Reason it is Unexpected in Politics

“Civility” in business is assumed.

“Civility” in politics is ignored. Here is why . . .

Matt owns a store. Every customer who enters his store is treated with care. When someone thanks Matt for his service he responds with the now famous phrase, “It’s my pleasure.”

Anna is a fitness coach. She draws clients by her winsome nature. Her encouragement to every person, no matter how they perform in their workout, is an attraction to return.

Why are Matt and Anna successful business people? One reason is, they treat others with respect. Why is treating others with respect important to Matt and Anna? Because their work is their livelihood. They pay their bills, care for their families, contribute to their communities with the monies earned from their work.

Walter Williams, famed economist from George Mason University, used to say,

“Do you think the farmers in Idaho grow their potatoes because they love the people in New York who eat their potatoes for dinner? No! Idaho farmers operate as everyone does in business, based on gain.”

Everyone wants their business, their livelihood, to succeed. Business people – no matter who they are – have to consider the bottom line. The bottom line depends on commerce with customers.

Respect of others is the basis for transactional commerce in Deuteronomy 24:10-13. The central value of commerce in Moses’ law is based on a concern for others. Deuteronomy states that loans are based on property one already owns. Our culture calls that “collateral.”

But the commercial agreement is based on goods another man has in his house. The text is plain. The one who has loaned the money stands outside the borrower’s house. The man who owes money goes into his house to decide what object of worth he will part with until his loan is paid. The clear teaching is that the one who makes the loan treats the borrower with dignity. The debtor decides what valuable he will part with to allow him time to pay back what is owed.

Further, such an action relieves any psychological stress on the one who owes money. Imagine the banker coming into your house deciding, then demanding, what he would keep until the debt was repaid?! Moses’ law showed compassion for the poor person and demanded respect for that person, from the rich person.

Moses’ instruction does not stop there. What if all the person has to give as collateral is his cloak? The cloak was important in the ancient world. The temperature – even in desert regions – falls dramatically overnight. A poor person would need their cloak to keep warm. During the day, the poor man, the borrower, would not need his cloak, the weather being warm during the day.

But the teaching is straightforward: if you have taken the cloak as collateral, then the cloak should be returned at night so that the man might stay warm while he sleeps. However, and this is important for the borrower, the reverse is suggested by the text: the cloak should be given back during the day to the person who is owed money. Such an act, by itself, was a reminder of the debt that was still owed.

The whole of the commercial transaction rests on the last statement in Deuteronomy 24:13,

“You shall restore to him the pledge as the sun sets, that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you. And it shall be righteousness for you before the Lord your God.”

Treating another person with dignity – treating them civilly – displays a righteousness. Doing what is “right” is not based on some human commitment. Doing “right” is based on a righteous God who gives a righteous law (Deut 4:8). The person who has been changed (declared righteous by God like Abram was in Genesis 15.6) keeps this righteous law, not out of his own effort, but because he has been changed. The results are righteous because the Law is “righteous, only righteous” (Deut 16.20) since God is righteous (Deut 32.4).

So why is civility absent in politics? My view: there is no direct, immediate connection between commerce and customer, between the bottom line and a politician feeding his or her family. Sure, there is compromise when bills are debated before lawmakers. But there is no righteousness standard connected to respecting others in a business arrangement where one person directly depends on the other for their livelihood.

God’s Law exists as a benefit for people (Deuteronomy 30:9-14).