Favoring Connection Over Conflict

Good writers convey arguments with vivid images. While this often makes for memorable writing, it also obscures important issues and simplifies complex situations into binary choices. This morning, I’m thinking of Rebecca Solnit’s striking piece On Not Meeting the Nazis Halfway.  While I agree with the gist of her argument—that not every issue has two positions that are equally valid and that endless listening is not always an effective or even ethical strategy—I take issue with her literary choices that actually fan the flames she claims to be fighting. It makes good reading and it does inspire me to stand for what I believe, but the inspiration comes at a cost.

When we equate all people who disagree with us with the extreme exemplars of their position, we add to the very problem we say we want to solve.

One of the hardest things for us humans to see is that we each have a part in what is going on. From my common sense position (and almost all of us believe that our position is common sense), I clearly see that most of my problems come from outside of me. ‘If only other people would stop being so greedy and deluded, I would be fine.’ Our own attachment to drama and conflict—our attachment to a particular and necessarily limited perspective—is mostly invisible to us.

Our efforts to solve a problem contain a wide range motivations—many of which are hidden from us. Often, the very actions I take to solve the problem are part of the problem. Einstein once said that problems cannot be solved at the level they were created. In politics and in society, it’s important to have inspiring speakers, writers and leaders that remind us of our values and encourage us to keep working for what we love. But there is a danger of getting get locked in the thrill (and thrall) of opposition.

Conflict itself is wildly stimulating. Conflict is passionate and enlivening. It may be unpleasant and scary, but it arouses us all. In speaking with friends about Trump and the Republican denial of Biden’s victory, I notice that we sometimes go into a trance state of anger, outrage and powerlessness. It’s like a switch gets flipped and we fall into a pit of darkness and despair. We wallow there for a while, then something else catches our attention and we go on.

Altered states are actually a normal part of human life. While we pride ourselves on being reasonable, most of us are occasionally or often carried away with some emotion or powerful idea. It’s not a problem, but it can be helpful to know when we have entered an altered state so we can be skillful in working with and living through their power. In altered states we have less access to our reasonable selves (pre-frontal cortex) as our brains have been flooded with dire messages of danger from our more primitive selves (amygdala).

Altered states are often a part of conflict. It can be important to know that they come and go. These aroused or depressed states have their own half-life. The brain is overwhelmed with danger signals for only a short time. If we can wait, even for a little, these trance states pass. (Hence the origin of the time-honored self-management technique of counting to ten before speaking in an aroused condition.) Altered states also give us access to powers and perspectives that can be necessary and helpful. But our whole person reasoning that engages heart, body and mind is not available to us in these states of disturbed consciousness.

In contrast to writing that polarizes, I want to draw attention to the writing of David Campt. His recent op-ed in the Atlanta Journal encourages us to shift from debate to dialogue. Of course, this is not possible with people whose position is hardened and who are not willing to engage in this way. But in Campt’s Ally Conversation Toolkit (ACT), he is clear that his goal is more limited. We will not be able engage everyone in a meaningful dialogue, no matter how skillful we are, but we certainly can engage some people—and this can make a huge difference.

‘The ACT Initiative aims to significantly reduce the percentage of white Americans who think that racism against white people is just as important a social problem as racism against people of color— 55 % in 2017. The goal of the initiative is to catalyze a cultural shift so that this figure is reduced to 45% by 2025.’

In a polarized society, it’s important to remember that there are always those whose attachment is more to an ongoing process of discerning truth rather than to maintaining a pure position. If we ourselves can stay in that group and work with others from different positions who share this value, then a shift of even 10% can radically alter our whole society.

In his piece in the Atlanta Journal, Campt mentions three helpful intentions as we try to move into dialogue with those near the middle who hold different positions:

1) Shift your intention from trying to demonstrate your position to searching for places of authentic connection
2) Tell stories. Be curious about the personal experiences that undergird your position and your partner’s position. Facts and figures are rarely helpful
3) Listen with heart.

We are all part of the fragile tribe of upright, mostly hairless, wanders who call themselves human beings. Forging empathic connections with people who see the world differently is the most powerful tool we have to find our way together through these disturbing times.