Center for Civic Friendship: The Art of Disagreement

Mary Jane Rein and Colleen Finn

Guest Writers

In an era of deepening political polarization, the Center for Civic Friendship has found an unexpected route to teaching the skills of respectful disagreement: hip-hop. The inaugural debate in our Civic Symposia series tackled the long-running feud between rap titans Drake and Kendrick Lamar, using this cultural rivalry as training ground for more consequential civic conversations.

The series aims to create spaces where students can practice the important art of passionate but respectful disagreement. Hosted in relaxed settings, like Pierre’s and Chuck’s, these discussions invite students to engage with controversial topics over shared meals. The Center for Civic Friendship is dedicated to promoting a culture of open and respectful inquiry that can help students engage in friendly dispute knowing that none of us is in full possession of the truth.

At the April 3 debate, first-year students Colleen Finn and Jaiven Diaz took center stage as the inaugural debaters. Finn made the case for Kendrick Lamar while Diaz advocated for Drake, each presenting arguments about their assigned artist’s contributions to hip-hop culture and musical innovation.

We began by considering the parallels between rap feuds and civic discourse. The tradition of the rap beef is akin to an ongoing debate as the rappers put out ‘diss tracks’ that challenge each other through bragging, insults, and innuendo. Yet, while the rappers revel in the language of insult, we talked about how rap feuds can be constructive in that they inspire artists to produce a lot of compelling music. The feud between Kendrick and Drake fueled their creativity and sharpened their craft.

This observation highlighted how creative tension—even conflict—can drive innovation and excellence. The 2024 escalation of the Drake-Kendrick feud showcased this dynamic, with both artists producing widely resonant work despite the personal nature of their exchanges. Kendrick’s “Not Like Us” became a cultural phenomenon that transcended typical genre boundaries while Drake responded with his own artistic statements.

During the debate, the participants evaluated the artists using multidimensional criteria: technical skill, lyrical depth, cultural impact, discography quality, versatility, authenticity, performance ability, and cultural resonance. This framework encouraged nuanced thinking beyond simple declarations of a “winner,” teaching participants to articulate value judgments based on explicit criteria rather than mere preference. Debate about divisive topics can accomplish the same thing by airing competing ideas in ways that help us to sharpen our arguments. While kindness toward each other eludes these superstar rappers, the student surrogates argued their cases with respect and care.

This distinction between the rappers’ approach and the students’ civility underscored the symposium’s ultimate goal: demonstrating that vigorous disagreement need not undermine social bonds or mutual respect. Students built skills in articulating clear perspectives, evaluating different types of evidence, recognizing personal bias, and understanding how different value systems shape judgments.

The event concluded by proposing a thought-provoking topic for a future debate: “Can we separate the artist from the art?” This question emerged directly from one of the more controversial aspects of the Drake-Kendrick feud—accusations against Drake involving inappropriate behavior with minors. By transitioning from the relatively “low-stakes” topic of artistic merit to this more ethically complex question, the series aims to gradually build students’ capacity for engaging with increasingly challenging material.

As polarization increases across American society, these skills become increasingly critical. The Center for Civic Friendship’s innovative approach suggests that perhaps the path to healing civic discourse might not begin with our most contentious political divisions, but with learning to debate passionately—yet respectfully—about the cultural expressions that move us. Through this creative framework, students aren’t just discussing music; they’re building the muscles needed for the challenging work of democratic citizenship in a diverse society.