Last weekend, the McGill Daily and Le Délit hosted the Canadian University Press’s annual conference at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in downtown Montreal. The conference was a huge success, providing a unique opportunity for student journalists from across the country to  meet one another and engage with professionals in the field. It’s ironic that the rich atmosphere of discourse fostered by the conference is often absent within McGill itself.

You’re probably sick of the circular arguments and fruitless back-and-forth that surrounds issues like Israel-Palestine, Choose Life, and increased fees for the Daily. Political discourse at McGill has come to resemble a schoolyard shouting match, particularly over the issue of QPIRG opt-out; it can barely even be called discourse any longer.

Discourse is an exchange of opinions between parties on equal footing. It involves an honest attempt to reconcile two opposing points of view; the goal is always increased understanding. What’s happening at McGill is not discourse. Two groups are yelling at each other so loudly that the other side can’t even hear what’s being said anymore. Anyone standing nearby who might want to listen has already been scared off by all the noise. Can these people even hear themselves?

The new Prince Arthur Herald was recently described in the Montreal Mirror as a news portal that “singles out the McGill Daily and thebubble.ca as bastions of the unreasonable campus left.” Such descriptions are even more disheartening for their utter predictability. The extremes on both ends of the political spectrum at McGill are a testament to our school’s diversity. However, they can also be “poisonous,” as Brendan Steven pointed out in his final Trib column last week.

A students, we’re expected to think critically about our own beliefs and opinions—to question assumptions we have never thought to question before. Just because representatives on both sides of the political debate at McGill are able to produce articulate and nuanced arguments for their own positions doesn’t mean they’re able to listen to the arguments expressed by their opponents. If we want to give genuine discourse a chance, we need to be able to listen to what other people are saying. We need to open our ears and our eyes.

But being open-minded about an issue is not simply a matter of saying that you’re willing to listen. Open-mindedness has to be demonstrated, over and over again, through gestures. In the many exchanges between the left and right at McGill, how often have you actually heard someone admit that they’re wrong?

Whether you’re a student or not, whether you read the Daily, the PAH, the Tribune, Le Délit, the Reporter, or the walls of the bathroom stalls in McLennan, it is always important to take a step back and gain some perspective. Remember that McGill gives us an once-in-a-lifetime chance to engage with a variety of viewpoints expressed by a variety of people. It gives us a chance to have our opinions challenged. The refusal to engage in discourse doesn’t just affect you—it affects everyone.