---

For those who think Democracy should be
a collaborative experience.

---

June 26, 2008

Communication Question – talking with your political opposite

Meryl,

I’m interested to hear strategies folks have employed to re-route political discussions they don’t want to have.

Some at work are vocal in sharing their strongly-held views on politics and/or religion. Regardless of my personal view on the topic, I prefer not to talk politics or religion unless it relates to the work at hand. It seems a high-risk conversation with limited potential benefit.

My father’s family regularly enjoys Socratic and roundtable debates hashing out such topics, whereas my mother is genuinely pained by such conversations and tends to escape. Her beliefs stem straight from her core and she gets genuinely upset when challenged or asked to explain them. She believes what she believes and doesn’t want to defend or explain them, nor does she seek to convert others. When others don’t share her position, she struggles to understand and avoid judging them; thus, she’d rather not go there, particularly with loved ones. Debating with dad’s side can be fun, but I respect mom’s needs enough to avoid the subject when she is in the group.

Without knowing who at work needs what on such touchy subjects, I’d rather not go there either. How can one communicate that effectively?

Meryl Responds,

I advocate having these conversations, not avoiding them. Otherwise, brash, bold and aggressive communicators dominate and the more sensitive perspectives never get heard. I imagine your mother’s aversion to these conversations is due to the fact is that most political discussions are argumentative and ungracious. She hold personal beliefs, and most political conversations treat the topic in callus, impersonal ways.

Interesting, isn’t it? – I suspect your mother’s voice is the one that most needs to be heard, and she’s the one who is reluctant to speak.

Sometimes we need to move into areas of discomfort. She (and you) could say something like:

• I have observations on this topic, but I hesitate to share them because the tone of the conversation is contentious, not cooperative. I work hard to understand what you’re saying, and if I feel like you’re willing to do the same for me, I’d be happy to share how I see the situation.

If her beliefs are deeply held, it could benefit everyone to hear them. It might shift the dialogue to a deeper level, too.

At work you could say,

I have strong feelings on this issue which I prefer not to share in a casual conversation.

That way, you can defer the conversation for a situation that respects your preference and needs.

June 20, 2008

What’s wrong with this picture?: Huge profit opportunities

The headline of a flyer said,

- Global warming calamity. Huge profit opportunities.

Isn’t it telling how readily we accept the morality of profiting from disaster? I remember Aaron Brown commenting on CNN early into the Iraq war,

- To the victor go the spoils.

He was explaining why France had no right to hope for Iraqi contracts. My thought was – where did we get the idea that it’s acceptable to profit from war, disaster and misery?

Now, the investment opportunity in the flyer I mentioned is in planet friendly technology. I’m all for that. In fact, my socially responsible investments are doing just fine, and that makes me happy. I have no problem with this particular investment. I just wish the marketers had appealed to…and thereby promoted the value of…social responsibility rather than greed. Naomi Kline calls it “Disaster Capitalism.” I’ve seen similar disaster headlines used to promote destructive investments. Clearly these headlines work. The headline creates a jolt and leads to a conclusion that makes people’s eyes light up like dollar signs.

Let’s challenge the assumptions of this kind of marketing.

June 18, 2008

Dare to desire

What is your vision of a perfect world? I’ve captured mine in a flash movie, A World of Truth.

Many people refrain from creating a vision of what they want because the reality is so different that the discrepancy is too painful. But if we can’t even picture what perfection would be, we’re doomed. We can never make it happen.

So fill in the blanks with your own vision – imagine a world where…

Dare to desire a better world.

I invite you to fill in the vision of my flash movie with the world you envision.

June 10, 2008

“What you don’t know CAN kill you”

Quoted from Journalist Bill Moyers.

June 9, 2008

I versus We

My husband and I both tend to be independent, and we will catch ourselves making decisions without consulting the other. He recently challenged me for excluding him from a process that I should have consulted him on. Of course, he was right. (And of course I hated that he was right.)

Your words reveal the way you think. I catch myself using the word “I” at times when I should be using the word “we.” I see it as a signal that it’s time to be more inclusive in my thinking.

I read an article years ago that said leaders who seek power to dominate rather than support to lead will substitute the word “I” for the word “we.” Statements like: “I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent” instead of we won’t do these things shifts power from the people to the leader.

“I” is exclusive. “We” is inclusive. An exclusive politician who knows this might use the word “we” in a tactical way. Only time can tell us that. But a leader who focuses on him or herself rather than appeal to a collective effort sends out red flags to those of us who would rather Unite and Concur.

Congressman Lee Hamilton’s advice to the consensus-starved

Retired Congressman Lee Hamilton says Americans are starved for consensus and that, building consensus is straightforward. Here’s his advice.

• Work cooperatively, not confrontationally.
• Look at your colleagues as colleagues, not political adversaries.
• Agree on facts before you apply your ideology to policy.
• Take ample time to understand different views and deliberate on where you’re going.
• Search for areas of agreement, and do not exaggerate areas of disagreement.
• Get people focused on the national interest, not on partisan advantage.
• Decide from the get-go that you’re going to reach an agreement, not use disagreement to score political points.

Keep these points in mind when you evaluate leaders and news sources, and when you plan your own approach to potentially contentious discussions.

Guest post ~ another unlikely alliance

Thanks to Wendy Mack for this beautiful example of how seeming enemies can Unite and Concur.

In April my husband and I attended the Rocky Mountain Plover Festival in Karval Colorado. Getting to see Burrowing Owls, Horned Larks, and Snowy Plovers was incredible, but the real highlight of the weekend was witnessing a unique human interaction.

The Plover Festival is a result of a partnership between the ranchers of Karval, the Colorado Division of Wildlife, and the Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory. That may not seem unusual until you realize that in most parts of Colorado (and the country) environmentalists and government employees are not welcome on a rancher’s land. In fact, one rancher from Karval said that 6 years ago he would have been quick to “show off” his gun and “run government intruders” off his land. Just a few years later this same rancher happily drove a truck hauling a trailer seating dozens of birders and wildlife officials all over his ranch. To top it all off, the ranchers (Karl, Jeff, and Russ) joked and laughed with Ken (CDW) and Seth (RMNBO) as if they were brothers!

Instead of focusing on the birds, I spent a lot of time asking our hosts about how this partnership had evolved and observing their interactions. Here are some highlights from what I learned:

COLLABORATION. The ranchers and birders kept talking about how much they had learned, and were continuing to learn from one another. This was not a one-sided situation where the government set out to change the ranchers. It was about figuring out how to work together to save ranches and birds.

RESPECT. The ranchers had made the biggest change in their thinking, yet Ken never let them put themselves down or say they had been wrong before. He constantly talked about how important the ranchers are and how much they were advancing the protection of the birds.

PATIENCE. The government team first approached the ranchers about conducing studies on their land more than 6 years ago. The first Plover Festival was held last year. It took five years, a lot of data collection, a lot education, and a lot of conversations to get here.

All in all, it was a beautiful weekend – in more ways than one.

Guest post ~ here to serve…a growing sense of order

This post is from Michael Mendenall, who is one of those people you’ve heard about who decided to get involved in politics this year for the first time. This post shows how his involvement made an immediate difference.

So I decided that this was the year that I would set aside my cynicism and get involved with the barely contained chaos of my chosen political parties caucuses…showed my hand there, but that’s all right…got elected as a delegate to the county convention for my candidate, and attended, excited for the experience.

The day started early, 7:00 am, and throughout showed no promise of ending in the same way. The procedure is to wait to do the actual voting for state convention delegates at the very end…and it is now twelve and a half hours into it, I’m tired, and the prospective delegates are bickering hotly as to how to proceed with the vote. So many folks are interested in becoming a state delegate that to actually vote on them would have taken untold hours, so it was eventually decided to simply pull names out of a hat, which brought more heated debate and derision.

I am beginning to question my commitment to the process…I have a diabetic cat to take care of, and am getting pretty low on the blood sugar myself, and I need to get out of there! Well, as it went, my name was the second one drawn from said magic hat, and amidst the shouted arguments, I stood up and called for attention…only to be shouted down.

But I am contrary, to say the least, and I was going to have my say.

• Excuse me, but I am obviously not as emotionally invested in this as it appears that many of you are.

(Here the clamor began to die down a bit, so I continued)

• I am here simply to be of service to my community, my party, my candidate, and my country…so I ask that my name be placed into the mix as an alternate to give another one of you a better chance of attending the (state) convention.”

And I sat down…to quiet and a growing sense of order.

One woman who was one of the most vocal of the dissenters, turned to me…”Hey, you’re a nice guy!” And was quiet from there on out…and I got home in time to give my cat his insulin shot and got to attend the State Convention as a delegate, anyway…all for speaking strong. Thanks, Meryl.

June 8, 2008

dare to care

I read an article this week about bystanders who ignored an elderly hit-and-run victim. I was ready to move on to another article when I realized – the bystanders weren’t the only ones who were chillingly unresponsive. I had read this article without responding emotionally. I had felt no sadness for a world where people show so little caring.

On closer inspection, I realized the article had triggered emotions, but I automatically shut them down so quickly that I hadn’t noticed they were there.

Why would I shut myself off from what I feel? Why are we afraid to care? Could it be that caring would be overwhelming? I think of a friend who watched an NPR documentary about plastic in the ocean and felt an urgent need to solve the problem. She was painfully aware that she was just one person, and what can one person do about plastic pollution twice the size of Texas? And even if she could solve the problem, there are so many more problems to solve.

I’ve been paralyzed into inaction. I once stood helpless with a circle of people around a man who apparently had a heart attack. The irony was, I was on break from a CPR training class. I was sick at heart for weeks – but it was a wake-up call for me to get the courage to act.

There are no guarantees that we can solve our problems – but if we stay paralyzed, it’s certain we won’t. If the people who exploit are the only ones motivated to play, failure is guaranteed. You are responsible for your actions – not the results. Dare to care – and do what you can. That’s all anyone can ask of you.

dare to hope

There was something about the combination of elements that inspired me. Amy Goodman showed clips on Democracy Now of Barack Obama declaring himself the nominee with Leonard Cohen’s Democracy playing. I felt my heart swell with a glimmer of hope for a new day.

I mentioned it to a friend who said, “I’m not letting myself feel hope. I’ve had my hopes dashed too many times.”

I can understand how anyone who had involved themselves in politics would feel an unwillingness to hope. I’m sure many Clinton supporters are feeling their hopes dashed these days.

Yet we must keep hoping. As my assistant Michael says: hope should never be dashed, only expectation.

So while it might seem risky to hope, I encourage you to nurture the hope you feel. Because hope is the only hope we have.

Here’s Democracy performed. See if it doesn’t create a glimmer of hope in your heart.

• A better way
• Across party lines
• Blog Guidelines
• Communciation questions
• Communication standards
• Get real
• Guest post
• Old school politics
• political persuasiveness
• Priorities
• SpeakStrong in Politics
• This week in the world
• Uncategorized
• What Not to Say
• What's wrong with this picture?