“Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that unless we love the truth we cannot know it.”
–Pascal
“Truth exists; only lies are invented.”
–Georges Braque
Tag Archives: conflict and society
Living with Differences
It can be difficult to work with other people for a variety of reasons. Some difficulties are easier to overcome than others. Often we can connect with people with a little creative sensitivity. But, sometimes it can require a great deal of patience and determination.
Why should we make this effort? There are critically important reasons to rise above our differences. To secure the safety of our communities and to resolve local problems, we will need “all hands on deck.” And, to seek a vision for the future that we can all get behind will require that we actually listen to and understand one another.
It is not necessary to compromise our personal views and beliefs. We each must maintain our personal dignity, integrity, and a confident sense of self.
That said, we will increasingly find it necessary to work with folks we may not feel comfortable with at first. The challenge is to be both self-confident and respectful as we engage with others to in the context of community.
Robert Heinlein made the point clearly when he said, “I never learned from a man who agreed with me.”
Coming to understand the personality and perspective of another individual can be useful in itself, even if no possibility of agreement exists. It can be the means for crystallizing our own thinking and beliefs. And, if we approach it as a learning opportunity, we have much to gain from one another in knowledge, skills, and experience.
Aristotle is believed to have said that “it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Well, Aristotle did not go to high school, and neither have some of us. But, it is our job to figure out what he meant and learn how to do it!
It is important to respect the integrity and sincerity of every other human being, allowing our differences to exist freely in their own space, distinct from the roles of community-member, teammate, or friend.
Suppose we find ourselves dealing with a person who presents us with special challenges – perhaps someone who does not believe effective community to be possible, or who values their privacy to an extreme, or who just seems unreceptive?
It is almost always possible to work with someone who we find difficult if we are patient, creative, and open to finding a way. It is important to understand from the beginning, however, that in such circumstances we cannot allow ourselves be emotionally needy or easily disheartened. Such an effort calls for a pleasant attitude and a generous spirit.
Often it is impossible to know why a person remains distant or unresponsive despite our best efforts. But, pain is often hidden there, whether it is conscious or not. And, caring will always give solace, however silently it is received.
The wise do not impose themselves until they obtain a hearing. If, however, we are able to plant the seeds of community in the fertile soil of the human heart, and water them gently with loving kindness, we may not have to wait long before their green shoots spring forth into the light of day.
When we make ourselves present in the life of another without expectation or demand, healing can take place without our knowing – until the dam breaks and the feelings flow.
We need not do more than simply be as fully present as that person will allow, and wait patiently in kindness until a response comes in the fullness of time.
It might take days, weeks, or years. But it will come.
In a little book called The Miracle of Dialogue (1963), the Christian theologian Dr. Reuel L. Howe wrote that “every man is a potential adversary, even those whom we love. Only through dialogue are we saved from this enmity toward one another. Dialogue is to love, what blood is to the body…. When dialogue stops, love dies and resentment and hate are born. But dialogue can restore a dead relationship.”
Tom
Next week: Understanding the Long Crisis
Anyone who fights for the future…
“Anyone who fights for the future, lives in it today.”
–Ayn Rand
The Power of Teamwork
As we make our way forward through this long crisis, we can expect an erratic path to the future. The sequence of events will be unpredictable. Progress toward our ultimate goal will be diverted and delayed by repeated shocks and disruptions.
We must shore up our spirits and brace ourselves for frustrations. Sharing vision and purpose with others will steady our course – and our nerves.
Community spirit, and the success of communities in determining shared purpose and strategies for coping, will be critically important. This can only happen when we rise above our differences and come to understand and trust one another as friends, neighbors, and allies.
Readers are quite right to question how I can expect the intense antipathy and incivility current among the American people to allow us to actually sit down and attempt to understand and cooperate with one another.
You may think the idea impossible, even absurd. But, as I have tried to explain, we have no choice. Our failure to do this in good faith could result in the absolute loss of the American Republic and everything it stands for.
I think it interesting that our young people can commit themselves to discipline, teamwork, and decisive action in the armed forces – while the rest of us appear unwilling to exercise even basic civility, much less the generosity and loyalty that have characterized the American tradition.
It is not necessary to compromise our personal views and beliefs. The challenge is to be both self-confident and respectful as we engage with others to resolve local problems. This may require that we adjust our attitudes. Can we come to terms with one another as teammates and compatriots committed to the fundamental integrity of the nation?
No cohesive effort can be mounted, much less succeed, if we cannot get ourselves onto the same page. This is not possible if we cannot listen with understanding and communicate with civility.
The way we handle working relationships and resolve local problems will be the first stage in preparing for the future. A right attitude for dealing with an immediate crisis, as I suggested in an earlier post, will probably be the right attitude for working with one another to build a better future.
There will be confusion at times, and a failure to fully comprehend the nature of problems. Many of us are demoralized or under immense pressure. Those who have the presence of mind to engage in problem-solving will need to step forward to engage and pull people together.
Working with people can be one of the greatest tests in life. To assist readers in approaching the challenges of working with people – including those who are especially difficult to work with – the forthcoming book will offer supportive guidelines for a variety of conditions and circumstances. These will include:
1) Overcoming personal differences to build trusting personal relationships.
2) Facilitation of public meetings.
3) Group decision-making where differences of perspective or opinion are present.
4) Addressing conflict by means of an approach known as conflict transformation.
5) Working in groups to plan and execute projects.
I expect you are wondering what I mean by “conflict transformation”, mentioned in #4. This is a practical approach to conflict developed by John Paul Lederach and others. His book is The Little Book of Conflict Transformation.
Conflict transformation looks beyond resolution of the obvious issues on the surface of a conflict, to recognize and respond to the deeper factors that simmer below the surface – the roots of a conflict. It seeks first to understand and address perceptions and underlying causes; second, to reduce adversarial confrontation; and, third, to address the human needs relating to the conflict and to invite participation in finding constructive solutions.
I will try to give you a brief taste of my own thinking on building trust in personal relationships next week. Related commentary may appear in future blog posts, but to gain access to a range of practical tools and guidance you may purchase the book when it becomes available.
Tom
Next week: Building strong working relationships
Note to readers: A table of contents and several chapter drafts from the forthcoming book are posted on the blog site. See especially Chapter One: American Crucible and Chapter Six: The Ground of Freedom.
Honesty
“Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.”
–Thomas Jefferson
“I am afraid we must make the world honest before we can honestly say to our children that honesty is the best policy.”
–George Bernard Shaw
Common Sense
“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”
–Albert Einstein
“Democracy is finding proximate solutions to insoluble problems.”
–Reinhold Niebuhr
“Society is always taken by surprise at any new example of common sense.”
–Ralph Waldo Emerson
If Humankind is to Survive…
“The fact is we can only love what we know personally. And we cannot know much. In public affairs, in the rebuilding of civilization, something less dramatic and emotional is needed, namely tolerance.”
–E. M. Forster (Novelist)
“If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life’s exciting variety, not something to fear.”
–Gene Roddenberry (Creator of Star Trek)
Values That Matter
Readers responded last week to my request for thinking about shared values for a genuine American renewal. What values can we agree on, I asked, as a foundation for a unified starting point – a common American “center” that transcends culture, religion, politics?
[This exchange of ideas took place primarily on the blog’s Facebook page, where more than 80 readers clicked post like: http://www.facebook.com/freedomstruth ]
Ideas were offered and important points were made. Values were identified and we heard the deeply felt need for government policies that reflect them. Frustrations were expressed, as well as some feelings verging on hopelessness.
I wrote of my belief that a small unified core of determined Americans could generate a powerful moral presence, if we articulate essential values clearly and project a vision for the future with a compassionate and welcoming spirit.
This would be immensely attractive to a nation desperate for the feel of solid ground beneath its feet.
A dynamic initiative will not require large numbers at the start. It will grow rapidly. I believe the vision of a civil order based on trust and responsibility will draw Americans to it from every walk of life – from every religious faith, from every economic condition and political philosophy.
A signed pledge would make individual commitment very clear. Such a pledge could be added in the back of the book, if you think this is a good idea. Please let me know what you think.
The hard part is this: It will require a willingness to temporarily set aside some of the political differences that separate us – until such time as we have secured the stability necessary to address common problems in our communities.
What is essential is not that we agree on every aspect of personal belief, but that we join with one another to restore the integrity of a civil society that allows for constructive cooperation, engaging with one another respectfully, so that we can secure the safety of our families and the economic well-being of local and regional communities.
If this is our priority we cannot allow America to disintegrate in unrestrained acrimony and hostility. We will have to choose our battles. Some will have to be fought on another day.
My request for your thinking may not have been clear regarding the distinction between government policies and the principles behind them. My intention here is to take the first step in building a foundation on which we can then proceed to structure debate and build policy.
Among genuinely committed Americans, finding common ground in our values will alter perceptions and increase our ability to actually listen to one another.
Stephen Covey wrote that “most people listen with the intent to reply, not to understand.” If Americans are to recover the vision of this country as free and fair, this will have to change.
In his best-selling book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey wrote:
“Every human has four endowments — self awareness, conscience, independent will and creative imagination. These give us the ultimate human freedom, the power to choose, to respond, to change.”
Our challenge is to establish a condition, a mental space, in which we can sustain this freedom and attract our fellow-Americans to it.
Having asked you last week to identify the values that should characterize such a condition, I will share those that I consider essential for a free and just society.
I add these to our commitment to defend the Constitution and respect the rule of law: Justice, equity, truthfulness, honesty, fair-mindedness, reliability, trustworthiness, and responsibility.
There you have it. These values are essentially universal, having been taught by every world religion down through the ages. Unfortunately, many of the followers of religion don’t get it, and so our work is cut out for us.
I would appreciate receiving another round of feedback from readers. Please focus your comments on basic values and the principles to live by – and share the reasons why you think the future of the world depends upon them.
Tom
In the coming weeks: Economic reconstruction and a future built on fairness.
Note to readers: You can support this blog and the book project by suggesting that your friends and associates take a look.
A Foundation for Renewal
I cannot imagine an American renewal without a meaningful dialog concerning values.
Can we rise above our differences as Americans to agree on the most basic of shared values? Will a courageous few stand together to agree on a unified starting point – a common American “center” that transcends culture, religion, politics?
Will the center hold?
It is difficult to visualize how this can happen, yet I believe we can do it and will do it. I believe it possible in part because it is not necessary to begin with large numbers. A small unified core of determined Americans can make this happen, citizens with the tenacity and open-minded compassion necessary to assert a powerful moral presence.
If we are willing and able to present a vision for the future with a generous and welcoming spirit, it will be immensely attractive to a nation desperate for the feel of solid ground beneath its’ feet.
I believe the vision of a civil order based on trust and responsibility will draw Americans to it from every walk of life – from every religious faith, from every economic condition and political philosophy.
And, yes, this begs a question. How can we agree? We have substantial differences. This is the hard part.
What is essential is not that we agree on every aspect of personal belief, but that we join with one another to restore the integrity of a civil society that allows for constructive cooperation, engaging with one another respectfully, so that we can secure the safety of our families and the productivity of our communities.
If this is our priority we cannot allow America to disintegrate in unrestrained acrimony and hostility. We will have to choose our battles. Some will have to be fought on another day.
James Madison fought to have slavery abolished in the Constitution when it was first drafted in 1787. It was painful for him to walk away from that vision, but he realized it threatened to kill the entire project. It took decades of determination for abolitionists to finally get the job done.
Today, however, agreement on certain principles will be immediately necessary. What must these be?
What are the core principles that will put America on the road to a dynamic future? Not the core principles held dear by each of us personally, but the essential principles required to pull a diverse people together as a nation.
Each of us will have to decide what we can accept in a healthy, diverse, pluralistic American society. Each will need to consider the extent to which we are prepared to engage in meaningful dialog and debate concerning this question.
I have suggested several principles in these blog posts that I consider essential. In addition to a firm defense of the Constitution, I have written of the necessity for trustworthiness, for responsibility, and the concept of constructive action – action based on the principle of refusing to hurt or do harm, whether by impatience, dishonesty, hatred, or wishing ill of anybody.
(See especially September 26, Foundation of Trust; October 12, Bringing Light to Darkness; October 17, Finding Courage in Crisis; and December 12, First Principles.)
Now I would like to hear from readers. What principles would you ask your fellow Americans to commit themselves to? Please contribute your comments.
And, what of those who remain hardened in attitude, closed-minded, or confused? What of those who simply refuse to accept any kind of responsibility?
We must stand firm in the midst of chaos and not be moved from our choice of principles or our determination to rise above our differences.
A fully American vision can only be reached through thoughtful consultation – by discussing our hopes and beliefs with one another in good faith, exploring the fault lines where we can find common purpose and a higher calling.
A valid vision of the future will require genuine engagement and understanding. Only then can we start working together on real problems and real needs.
We are either all in, building a free, fair, and productive society, or we are each on our own in a devastated world.
Tom
A note to readers: Please share your thinking about principles and fundamental American values in your comments.
Keeping Our Eyes on the Prize
“An attempt to achieve the good by force is like an attempt to provide a man with a picture gallery at the price of cutting out his eyes.”
–Ayn Rand
“They say ‘means are after all means’. I would say ‘means are after all everything’. As the means so the end.”
–Mohandas Gandhi
Reuters image
The Second Amendment, Then and Now
The Bill of Rights, which includes the first ten of the amendments to the Constitution, was first proposed to Congress by James Madison as articles to be incorporated into the main body of the Constitution.
Congress approved twelve articles of amendment to the Constitution in 1789 and submitted them to the states for ratification. Contrary to Madison’s proposal, they were submitted as “supplemental” additions. Articles Three through Twelve were ratified by the required number of states and became Amendments One through Ten in 1791.
The Second Amendment, which has become a matter of considerable interest in recent years, reads as follows:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
This was not controversial at the time. The concept existed in English common law long before the enactment of the Bill of Rights. And for a variety of reasons today many Americans feel it is necessary to own firearms.
The importance of this issue to the founders was quite clear. James Madison introduced the language that became the Second Amendment and also wrote: “The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
Alexander Hamilton, like Madison a strong advocate for Federalism, was equally explicit: “The constitution shall never be construed…to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
Thomas Jefferson famously said: “No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.” And he also wrote that “The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
During the years leading up to the Revolutionary War there was mob violence in several of the colonies. In addition, many American lived in or close to wilderness regions where conditions were essentially lawless. The need people felt to protect their families was quite rational.
It should be noted that a primary motivation for supporting “a well regulated Militia,” articulated in the Second Amendment as “being necessary to the security of a free State,” was the strong opposition among the founders to the concept of a standing army.
Thomas Jefferson put it this way: “None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important.” “Every citizen should be a soldier,” he wrote. “This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.”
The American reality in 1776 and 1791 was entirely different from that confronting us today. Yet, news of social, religious, and psychopathic violence imposes itself on us every day. Older Americans are particularly sensitized to what has changed: the radical loss of trust and the lack of civility, ethical integrity, and social responsibility we see everywhere.
We must acknowledge the compelling reasons why so many feel it necessary to own firearms.
That said, however, I must tell you I believe the use of force among Americans today, in defense of the Constitution and the American freedoms, would be counterproductive and incompatible with an effective strategy.
Our consideration in recent posts of the dynamic relation of means to ends should, in my view, make this clear.
Violence committed by Americans against Americans would contradict the rationale behind the impetus to violence itself. It would be self-contradictory, pitting brother and sister against brother and sister, subverting the integrity and viability of the American Idea as a guiding force for the good.
We can do far better.
I have presented principles supporting this assertion in previous posts, (see especially Nov 28 and Dec 12), and will offer a more explicit argument next week.
We need to consider this carefully and get it right. We face a long crisis. Many dark and dangerous things are possible.
Tom
Next week: Principled Means, Principled Ends
Note to readers: You can support this blog and the book project by suggesting that your friends and associates take a look.
First Principle
If we are to rebuild the foundations of this nation in a manner consistent with principle, it will be wise to employ means that lead effectively to the ends we seek. Let us proceed with wisdom and foresight rather than emotion and ego.
Nothing will cause greater destruction to our purpose than a combative attitude that alienates the very people we need to win over.
If we avoid allowing our differences to tear us apart, we can choose to cooperate in addressing the structural problems that threaten the safety and security of our communities. And, it is only in the context of personal relationships tasked with essential responsibilities that we can come to understand and influence one another.
As long-time readers know, I have urged that we turn away from the dysfunction, dishonesty, and deceit of national politics to the extent possible, and join with one another to rebuild America in our local communities.
I have described three essential elements – trust, dependability, and constructive action – which will be necessary to regain stability and to move us forward. These elements will only be found in communities where neighbors rise above their differences to serve a higher purpose.
I have chosen the term “constructive action” to describe the means by which we can realistically progress. And I have explained in recent posts why a shared sense of purpose will be required to guide constructive action.
Shared purpose, I wrote, is a lens through which the challenges of necessity can be brought into focus. The efforts of diverse personalities can be coordinated. Purpose provides a standard by which to determine priorities and judge progress. In short, forward motion is essential; yet it is impossible without unity of purpose.
So, how can we understand constructive action?
Constructive action is action based on the refusal to do harm. It is action taken in a spirit of respectful kindness, a spirit founded upon the refusal to fight, to kill, or to damage. The principle here is the refusal to hurt – by impatience, dishonesty, hatred, or wishing ill of anybody.
I submit to you that this is the first principle upon which all other values, principles, and purposes depend.
Please do not misinterpret constructive action as merely a negative state of harmlessness. Quite the contrary, while constructive action in its purest form attempts to treat even the evil-doer with good-will, it by no means assists the evil-doer in doing wrong or tolerates wrong-doing in any way.
The state of constructive action requires that we resist what is wrong and disassociate ourselves from it even if doing so antagonizes the wrong-doer.
There is a close relationship between the positive spirit of kindness, respect, and trustworthiness that characterizes constructive action and the moral integrity of the free society we wish to build. The two are inseparable.
Constructive action is the means. Unity of purpose, grounded in the truthfulness of moral integrity, is the end.
Western political thinking has always considered means to be either an abstraction of tactics or simply the character of social and political machinery. In both cases means are considered only in their service to the desired ends, or goals, of particular political interests. We will approach our understanding of means in quite a different way, replacing an end-serving with an end-creating function.
Such an approach to means is necessary if we seek to apply traditional American values to rapidly changing circumstances.
This is the reason for my insistence on the meaningful engagement of all Americans in this endeavor, despite our vast diversity. A genuinely American future can only be realized in the context of our differences.
I believe this is what America has always been about. Is it what we want now, or not?
We have a clear choice to make. Either we choose to recover and reconstruct the fundamental meaning of the American Idea, or we can walk away forever from the safety, stability, and meaning of an America we can trust and believe in.
Tom
A note to readers: The next several posts will explore the meaning and implications of this “first principle.” I will take a breather for the holidays, so please look for the next post on January 2-4: “The Second Amendment, Then and Now”.
Liberty and the American Idea 