Michael Dunn understands the importance of reaching across the political divide. He and his own brothers are on opposite sides.
“But it’s so hard,” said the Riverside resident and a founding member of the Inland Communities Fellowship of Reconciliation, a local chapter of a 90-year-old, national interfaith organization that advocates for nonviolence, disarmament and peace.
“The emotions are so strong.”
Dunn, who has advocated for peace and reconciliation all his life, said even he has trouble understanding his own family members who supported President Trump in Tuesday’s election.
“I just can’t seem to understand why some people vote the way they do,” said Dunn, who supported Vice President Joe Biden. “How can such a person (Trump) get 50% of the vote? Why was it so close? Personally, I find it disappointing and depressing. And I consider myself to be an optimist. Is this a failure on my part to be able to fully understand why 50% of us are willing to support the current administration?”
From the very beginning, Biden has positioned his presidential campaign as a “battle for the soul of the nation.”
But after election results show the nation may be better described as the “Divided States of America” — with 47.8% of voters picking Trump and 50.5% choosing Biden, as of Friday — it appears that more and more Americans, like Dunn, are engaging in the process of soul-searching. They are wondering if it is at all possible to start talking to one another and take the first step toward bridging the chasm that has opened up — pitting friends, siblings, co-workers and community members against one other.
Erosion of civility
The erosion is so deep that a return to civility may be difficult, said Derric J. Johnson, vice president of the Los Angeles Human Relations Commission and founding director at the Equity and Justice Institute at Crossroads School for Arts and Sciences in Santa Monica.
“The modicum of decency has eroded,” he said. “There is no filter that exists. Folks have taken off their masks and they’ve allowed themselves to actualize who they are and what they believe in — on both sides. And they’ve lost the ability to be tolerant.”
Social media as well as media, tilting to the right and left, have allowed people to pick their bubbles and remain comfortably ensconced within them, Johnson said.
“We have mechanisms that create these echo chambers where we center on people, statements and views that are aligned with our own and we have no reason to break out of our silos,” he said. “We’ve found our tribe, our community. We choose where we live — red states and blue states and cities. We choose to engage, live and create these environments where we don’t have to confront an opposing view or to engage with someone who has a different vantage point.”
Reaching out
In such a time of acute polarization, taking the first step toward reconciliation — or mending broken relationships — can be difficult, said Tania Israel, professor of psychology at UC Santa Barbara and author of “Beyond Your Bubble: How to Connect Across the Political Divide, Skills and Strategies for Conversations That Work.”
Israel says immediately after the election, it might be best to process one’s emotions by celebrating or grieving with others who have similar reactions to the results.
“After that might be a better time to start by first reaching out to people who are close to us and with whom we’ve had conflict over politics,” she said. “The holidays are actually a great time to do it.”
So, how would one begin to have such a conversation? Israel advises going into it with the intention of learning more about the other person’s perspective.
“You have to be interested in what they say,” she said. “That doesn’t mean you have to shift your own views. It’s about being righteous without being self-righteous. Hold on to your values, but be respectful of other people’s values, too.”
Israel recommends these conversations “take place face to face and not Facebook to Facebook.”
“In this time of social distancing, phone, Zoom or FaceTime is also fine as is meeting outdoors while maintaining distance,” she said. “And then, give people the gift of uninterrupted time to speak.”
The main roadblock to having this conversation today is people’s skewed and distorted perceptions of those with different ideas than their own, Israel said.
“We’re seeing people on the other side as more extreme than they actually are,” she said. “In reality, most people are in the middle. We’re just hearing more from people in the extremes. That person you’re thinking of on the other side is not as far on the other side as you think they are. And that’s why it’s all the more important to have these conversations.”
Find common ground
Reconciliation is a process that requires civility, truthfulness, forgiveness, kindness, humility and inclusiveness, said Linda Biehl, mother of Amy Biehl, a Fulbright scholar from Newport Beach who was killed by an angry mob of Black youth in a township outside Cape Town in 1993. Biehl’s daughter, who was White, was dragged out of her car, stoned and stabbed to death by a group of anti-apartheid activists who were pumped up after a rally and saw her driving through their township.
But Linda Biehl and her husband, Peter, returned to Guguletu, the township where their daughter was killed, and established a foundation in her name to serve the youth with after-school programs and food distribution. The Biehls did this because they believed it was the best way to preserve the legacy of their daughter who was passionate about fighting for the rights of the marginalized and disenfranchised.
Two of the men convicted of killing Amy Biehl later came to work for the foundation, and Linda Biehl says they have become like sons over time. Both she and her husband testified in South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission spearheaded by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Their testimony helped free the four men convicted of killing their daughter.
Linda Biehl says reconciliation may seem an abstract concept to Americans and will likely remain that way until it produces a tangible result. She cites the efforts of Nelson Mandela and F. W. de Kerk, then president of South Africa, who worked together to dismantle apartheid and eventually were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
“They didn’t like each other, but they saw that if they didn’t work together, their country was not going to survive,” Biehl said.
For Americans today, the first step may be “to find that common ground of civility,” she said.
“We can start by not calling each other names,” she added. “It may be hard to do it through the government. But it may still be possible to do it at the community, grassroots level.”
Bjorn Ihler, a survivor of a 2011 Norway terrorist attack on the island of Utoya that left 69 people dead, suggests it’s individuals who build the foundation for those grassroots efforts.
“Reconciliation processes are not about politicians,” Ihler said. “It’s about people trying to live their daily lives, and communities coming together is certainly a part of that.”
Polarization is not unique to the United States, but is a growing global trend, said Ihler, who is executive director of the Sweden-based Khalifa Ihler Institute, a think-tank that promotes peacebuilding efforts.
“So where do you start? Have tea with your neighbor,” he said. “It’s really easy to forget that most people are decent. Even the people who voted differently than you are just trying to do what’s best for their families. If we remember that, having tea and a conversation becomes much easier.”
Room for emotions
At the same time, conflict or confrontation should not be entirely ruled out, said Alison Edwards, CEO of OC Human Relations.
“Conflict can be productive because it’s often how we come to new ideas and find ways to solve problems,” she said. “Conflict is like fire. It can burn things, but it can also heat food and bring sustenance. We can call out racism and bigotry and still be mindful that we have to preserve everyone’s human dignity. It’s hard and messy work that takes a deep commitment to your community.”
It’s also OK to be passionate and emotional about civic causes, said Kayla DeMonte, managing director of Seattle-based Citizen University, which runs programs and training in civic engagement.
“Politics is not transactional, it’s emotional,” she said. “We don’t ask people to leave feelings and ideas at the door. It’s also important to engage with one another and not back away from important conversations. We don’t need fewer arguments, but better arguments. We suggest that people don’t start a conversation with the most polarizing thing, but talk about their formative experience and seek to understand how those beliefs were formed, not just what their beliefs are.”
At all times, it is important to separate the individual from their thoughts and actions, said Tara Sethia, professor of history and director of the Ahimsa Center at Cal Poly Pomona. She cited Mahatma Gandhi who, during the freedom struggle in India, insisted that no one should hate the British.
“The idea of not hating people who don’t think like you is essential to the process of reconciliation,” she said. “We tend to look at the way people think and who they are as the same. When we separate the individual from their thoughts and behaviors, the door to reconciliation opens.”
From https://ift.tt/2H0fTCQ, find us on maps: https://bit.ly/31tHUKW
No comments:
Post a Comment