Current Issue – Page 10 – intramuralist ™

01/31/2017

immigration, compassion, & more…

I was a young twenty-something, working somewhere between 50-60 hours per week, in the early years of a career in Human Resources in the hospitality industry. Step one meant mastering the management trainee program, with extensive time spent in each department, familiarizing myself with both the function and people necessary to make things run efficiently.

One of the friends made during that time was a shy young breakfast cook, named “Pepe.” He actually had a longer, fun name to say — at least 10 syllables (!!) — but as he’d wink and smile at our attempts to say it properly, with a beautiful Mexican accent, we all agreed that “Pepe” worked just fine.

Pepe stood out to me. Truth is, he was one of the kindest, gentlest men I’ve ever met. He never took things for granted; he worked hard, was punctual, loyal, and always did what he said he would do; he was fully trusted and relied upon. He was also incredibly shy.

Pepe rarely spoke before being spoken to first. He listened well, but it took many weeks before he’d even look me in the eye. There was just a sweetness in that shyness that was both authentic and endearing.

Pepe had left the states for sometime in order to be with his family in Mexico. When he returned — and I deeply respect how hard this must have been for him — he came to me asking for a place to live. As a young professional, I really had little. But as a legal immigrant, Pepe had even less.   I had a one bedroom flat on the second floor of a woodworking business, on a median in the middle of the road (yes, you read that correctly). Pepe and I worked out an arrangement where for four months, he slept on my couch.

The situation was that Pepe’s wife was still in Mexico. He came back to the U.S. with an appropriate work visa, hoping to save enough money to return home and provide for his family. While Pepe worked full time as a breakfast cook at my hotel, he also worked full time at another hotel as a dinner cook. It was thus not unusual for Pepe to work a minimum of 16 hours per day. In other words, even though we agreed that he could fully use my flat and sleep on that humble sofa, I rarely saw him there. He worked harder and more than anyone I’ve ever known.

On a rare day, Pepe and I would have an evening off that overlapped. Those days were precious. While his broken English and my even-more-broken Spanish often prompted an immediate chuckle for the other, we communicated well. In fact, our favorite thing to do those nights was read together. Pepe, grateful for a mere roof over his head, bought me a paperback bible. The left side of each page was in English — the right, in Spanish. Together we read the Bible, attempting to connect at deeper, heartfelt, meaningful levels. It was one of the most fascinating, beautiful seasons of my life.

I always find myself troubled when the immigration debate heats up. Let’s face it; it has heated up on multiple occasions, but in the current climate of seemingly far too many who are ready to either (1) immediately pounce on the next perceived evil thing Pres. Trump does, or (2) immediately praise the next perceived wonderful thing Pres. Trump does, it’s very difficult to have reasonable dialogue, separating fact from fiction, and discerning where and where not to be concerned.

I admit: I am uncomfortable with the global rise in terrorism and the significant number of persons who wish to harm Americans and Christians simply because of who they are and what they believe. I would like to find reasonable, compassionate ways to ensure those persons — who truly are the ones most motivated by evil — have lesser access to succeed in such heinous activity.

But I also wish we would never allow our need to screen out the terrorist to extinguish our compassion for the refugee — our compassion for the tired, poor, and the “least of these.”

It helps me, therefore, to think of Pepe. Pepe reminds me of the compassion each of us should have for one another… and yet, we are so stingy with our mercy and grace. Maybe we withhold it from the refugee; maybe we withhold it from those who sincerely desire to keep out the terrorist. The challenge is that too often too many justify withholding it from someone.

I wonder where Pepe is now… how his wife and children are. I have no doubt they are somewhere, thriving… following their father’s example… full of that exceptional, endearing kindness… and reading wisdom on the couch together.

Respectfully…
AR

01/29/2017

“the extremist”

While I’m going out on a bit of a blogging limb here, my guess is that every enthusiastic, active blogger has about 37 different ideas they’re pondering in their head all at the same time. Some develop into immediate posts; others take weeks, months, even sometimes years to formulate into a semi-coherent opinion. (I think my current number stands at 38.)

Hence, for over a year, I’ve been pondering the following post. I’m still not quite finished in its formulation, but it seems there’s a deep truth here — a truth I stumbled upon with a long time friend many months ago. Together we questioned the state of society — the good, bad, ugly, and all that’s in between. It was a great time… so authentic, such a give-and-take with many angles to learn and digest from… excellent, varied perspective… with both of us seeking something better than what we too often witness.

We seek solution… peace… and a “win-win” (Covey Habit #4, by the way).

But in our conversation that fall, we soon stumbled upon a proverbial thorn — far more than a thorn, actually. We identified one aspect among us that is challenging. It always seems to be the one thing actively attempting to pierce any progress. It is an unmistakeable impediment to solution. We identified “the extremist” as a significant, societal problem.

The challenge today immediately evolves, no less, to who “the extremist” actually is…

Who is this?

Who is “the extremist”?

And therein lies the challenge.

The challenge is that without a doubt, “the extremist” exists on both the proverbial left and right. However, we tend to minimize the one who, while potentially “extreme,” shares our bottom line opinion; in other words, we are far more graceful to the likeminded — especially, since we like the way they vote — and don’t want to disrupt that.

And so for my friend and me, we found ourselves in search of a better question. Instead of “who actually is this,” we settled on the better question of what do these pejorative persons most have in common; what are the characteristics that identify “the extremist”?

In total transparency, we never settled on a complete, concise list. I think our conversation will continue. But the below is what we pondered then — and continue to ponder now. How relevant are the following 15 characteristics? Is this what we see too frequently in “the extremist”?

An unwillingness to listen
An unwillingness to admit any wrongdoing or wrongful thinking
An inability to communicate with unlike others
An inability to argue calmly
Anger
Arrogance and condescension
An attempt to instill fear in others
A lack of consistent logic
Scornful of compromise
A refusal to change
No admittance of hypocrisy
Utilization of stereotypes or entire people group designations
Provocation and derived pleasure from provocation
The end justifying the means
And complete blame of the “other” side

If we could find a way to effectively and respectfully wrestle with “the extremist” — even if he/she is among our own likeminded — then perhaps we could find more solution and peace… actually making it a win-win… and building those necessary bridges to so-called “other” sides.

Respectfully…
AR

01/26/2017

synergize

My family has long been fans of Steven R. Covey, the American author and businessman who passed away a little more than six years ago. Said one brother, “Covey’s books are about more than time management; they’re about life management.”

Covey was brilliant.
Covey was wise.
And Covey would be good for each of us to defer to now.

In his most popular work, Covey offers “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.” In this book — which has sold over 25 million copies worldwide — Covey promotes what he labels “The Character Ethic” — or aligning our values with so-called “universal and timeless” principles. He then shares the infamous 7 habits:

(1) Be Proactive
(2) Begin with the End in Mind
(3) Put First Things First
(4) Think Win-Win
(5) Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood
(7) Sharpen the Saw

Oh, wait… sorry… I forgot #6. My apologies.

The sixth habit of highly effective people is to “synergize.” Allow me to expand a little more on its insightful meaning. Take not my word for it; take Covey’s:

“To put it simply, synergy means ‘two heads are better than one.’ Synergize is the habit of creative cooperation. It is teamwork, open-mindedness, and the adventure of finding new solutions to old problems. But it doesn’t just happen on its own. It’s a process, and through that process, people bring all their personal experience and expertise to the table. Together, they can produce far better results that they could individually. Synergy lets us discover jointly things we are much less likely to discover by ourselves. It is the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. One plus one equals three, or six, or sixty — you name it.

When people begin to interact together genuinely, and they’re open to each other’s influence, they begin to gain new insight. The capability of inventing new approaches is increased exponentially because of differences.

Valuing differences is what really drives synergy. Do you truly value the mental, emotional, and psychological differences among people? Or do you wish everyone would just agree with you so you could all get along? Many people mistake uniformity for unity; sameness for oneness. One word — boring! Differences should be seen as strengths, not weaknesses. They add zest to life.”

I see some great truths in Habit #6… valuing differences… truly valuing the mental, emotional, and psychological differences among people… not mistaking uniformity for unity. I admit… I think we struggle with valuing differences. I also wonder if it’s because we’re fearful we may have to admit our own flaws or weaknesses or areas of wrongful thinking in the process. Said a long time professional colleague of our family, “I wish I was as correct about one thing as some people think they are about everything.”

That’s it.

We’re just not very good at valuing what’s different in another…

Especially now.

But before I conclude this day’s post, let me again apologize for the error in omitting #6 above — the need to synergize and learn to value those who think differently.

Then again, that omission seems pretty frequent these days…

Respectfully…
AR

01/24/201701/24/2017

what I’ve learned…

Despite the notion that everything we needed to learn could somehow be done in kindergarten, I’ve learned a few new things in recent weeks…

I’ve learned that words matter…
(… shoot… I did learn that in kindergarten… but… I’ve learned that not everyone did learn it there…)

I’ve learned that people care about our country…
Granted, the masses express their care differently, but difference is not an accurate indicator of sincerity.

I’ve learned that we’ve got some tough stuff to handle in this country…
The reality is we’ve had some tough stuff for a while, but certain instances and events often bring specific issues to the forefront.

I’ve learned that pomp and circumstance always has the potential for goosebump giving…
That helps if we respect the office, even when challenged to respect a person.

I’ve learned that politics is still in play for too many people…
Of course, they creatively cover it up and try to sell us on a far better-sounding motive.

I’ve learned that passionate opinion — even when I don’t understand it — is to be respected…
This is not always easy, as understanding the opinion of another typically takes significant work.

I’ve learned that work is worth it…
True, sometimes we’re too tired, exhausted, or even unwilling; it’s still worth it.

I’ve learned that social media doesn’t equate to conversation…
(… oh, wait… I learned that before, too…)

I’ve learned that social media often does more harm than good…
While it’s great to keep connected, too often we feel justified in forgoing connection.

I’ve learned that people are more important than things…
That means that building relationships will always mean more than building opinion.

I’ve learned that too many times, I justify stating first how I feel rather than being intentional in asking another…
“Change Your Questions Change Your Life”… great read, by the way.

I’ve learned that it’s ok to cheer for patriots…
(… and Falcons, Packers, and Steelers, no less…)

I’ve learned that a clear majority seem to crave hope and change…
Granted, what we hope will change is different for different people.

I’ve learned that many people, groups, and adults often feel looked down upon…
Unfortunately, we can be pretty selective as to which groups we’ll support and which ones we won’t.

I’ve learned that empathy is often inconsistent…
(… going back to being selective as to which groups we’ll support…)

I’ve learned that hate speech is still alive on planet Earth.
But true, people have different perspectives and justifications as to what is/is not “hate.”

I’ve learned it’s thus easy to be judgmental — even among the intelligent.
Sometimes I don’t know what I don’t know; and if I don’t take the time to truly investigate, understand, and put myself in the shoes of another, then I’m more apt to be judgmental.

I’ve learned that when we’re judgmental, we have a hard time learning anything else.
(… no doubt one reason why it’s wise to be on our knees each day…)

I’ve learned I’ve got a lot to learn.

Why?

Because not everything I need to learn was done in kindergarten.

Respectfully…
AR

01/15/201701/15/2017

being there, father mulcahy, & going first

“Why are you being so rude?”
“Because he was rude first.”

“Why won’t you listen?”
“Because he stopped listening to me first.”

“Why are you so insulting, and justifying all the name calling?”
“Because he did it first.”

He did it… she did it… they did it… The bottom line is that someone else did it; someone else did it first; and their doing it first now allows me to do it, too. Friends, I’m concerned how significantly this line of thinking has permeated pop culture. We are justifying foolish behavior.

In search of something more positive on the net last week, I came across a great, inspiring post by New York Times bestselling author, Marcus Brotherton. With all the justified, poor and polarizing behavior, we need some inspiring posts.

It was entitled: “3 Things We Can Learn from Father Mulcahy,” a man identified by Brotherton as a “1st Lieutenant and later a Captain, a Catholic priest sent to minister to soldiers of all faiths at the 4077th Mobile Army Surgical Hospital during the Korean Conflict of 1950-1953”.

Father Mulcahy was cleverly portrayed by William Christopher for 11 seasons of “M*A*S*H”. Christopher passed away two weeks ago. Here, no less, is much of what we could learn — replacing some of our current behaviors:

“You were a good man, Father Mulcahy…

1. Your words were few, but your presence loomed large.

As a chaplain you were tasked with caring for others. Yet you seldom dispensed advice, you never moralized, and your words were few. Instead, your presence did the real talking…
In the rough-and-tumble of your friend’s life, you were simply ‘there.’

2. You wrestled with the complexities of life, and we wrestled along with you.

Your actions invited us to weigh in on a complex question — at least in our minds — because in our real world every day we wrestle with right and wrong.

3. You fulfilled your purpose by immersing yourself in a messy world and offering hope.

As a priest, you were a regular guy, Father. You were an amateur boxer. You played cards. You threw back a drink every now and then with the gang.
We identified with your jokes. Your earthiness. Your homespun demeanor.
We liked how you played the piano, how you wore your Loyola sweatshirt. How Colonel Potter called you by his own affectionate nickname for you — ‘Padre’ — and how you lightheartedly referred to your one sibling, Kathy, a nun, as ‘my sister the Sister.’
We liked how, in your priestly quest for righteousness, you never tried to separate yourself from the people around you. You were never standoffish. Instead, you went where people needed you most — even when it wasn’t safe.”

Even in environments which we sense as something less than safe, the foolish behavior isn’t helping. We can “be there” for others — whether or not we agree on all things. We can weigh the complex questions together — respectfully — as there is both right and wrong in this world.

And yes, this world is messy. But hope still exists.

We can do this. We can stop the foolish behavior.

It doesn’t even matter who goes first.

Respectfully…
AR

01/12/2017

an unpopular conversation

Friends, to quote one I respect, “none of this is easy.”

Eight years ago, one man was elected that many felt justified in vilifying. Approximately eight weeks ago, it happened again. I can sense the immediate sighs and spine bristles. It’s ok. I am not here to invalidate nor be callous with any opinion. We don’t all share the same opinion; and one of the growth steps in life is recognizing that if there are 360° in a circle, there exists far more than “my” right angle through which to view. It’s just that most of us are challenged to acknowledge the validity of other angles.

What I wish to say today is not very popular. I’m sorry; it’s ok. I mean no disrespect, but popularity has never been this blog’s aim. In fact, when the Intramuralist was in its infancy, I was told not to expect more than two to read consistently. I was thus pleased when my mother promised to read.

Back, no less, to my unpopular thought…

I am uncomfortable with the vilifying vitriol directed at our nation’s leaders. Even with my own, genuine frustration with certain attitudes, outcomes, and ideologies (on all sides), I am disappointed in the plethora of demeaning, rhetorical rants — even my sometimes own — as it’s my sincere desire to refrain from the disparaging fray. But that’s it, isn’t it? We are the justifier of our rants. We can only see that single angle. And then our very comfortable, likeminded audience offers generous insulation, spurring on any insolence.

We quickly add a “big but”… “But he/she did…” “But he/she didn’t…” “But he/she is…” “But he/she isn’t…” and then we justify completely denigrating another human being. After all, “but he/she” should have known it comes with the territory.

Call me naive. Call me wrong. Feel free to call me seriously misguided. I’m ok with that assertion. What I’m not ok with, however, is the complete, justified denigration of another human being. We can disagree without being disrespectful. We can have serious, deep concerns without being cruel. And we can passionately, ideologically oppose another without being odious. Our self-justified, vicious vitriol has been awful… and it’s been awful for a long time.

Have we lost our way? … a way that knew refraining from judgment and condemnation was wise? … a way that surrendered the need to denigrate? Or are we now a more united state of America, united by those who justify the judgment — regardless after eight years or weeks ago?

Said by one leader I respect this week:

“… None of this is easy. For too many of us, it’s become safer to retreat into our own bubbles, whether in our neighborhoods or college campuses or places of worship or our social media feeds, surrounded by people who look like us and share the same political outlook and never challenge our assumptions. The rise of naked partisanship, increasing economic and regional stratification, the splintering of our media into a channel for every taste – all this makes this great sorting seem natural, even inevitable. And increasingly, we become so secure in our bubbles that we accept only information, whether true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that’s out there.

This trend represents a third threat to our democracy. Politics is a battle of ideas; in the course of a healthy debate, we’ll prioritize different goals, and the different means of reaching them. But without some common baseline of facts; without a willingness to admit new information, and concede that your opponent is making a fair point, and that science and reason matter, we’ll keep talking past each other, making common ground and compromise impossible…”

Science and reason matter. People matter. Why the divine put us on this planet — and gave us science, reason, and other people — matters. But we’re so secure in our likeminded bubbles — in our bubbles that justify disrespect — that we no longer seem able to see all that matters.

I want more. I know. It may be unpopular, but I want to not only reach across the aisle per se, but I want to sit down, have coffee, and work diligently to understand why another feels the way they do. I want to be able to hear the fair point of one of those 359 other angles than my own. But the vitriol, even among the intelligent, has impeded all healthy debate.

We need to sit, listen, respecting all others.

I know. That’s not popular. It’s not easy either.

Respectfully…
AR

01/05/2017

can correctness go too far?

In our seemingly frequent, politically correct culture, I heard someone recently ask what the problem actually is with political correctness. Great question. And one we should talk about.

Perhaps we should first define what it is…

Political correctness (or colloquially “PC”) equates to “the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against” (per Oxford Dictionaries).

The goal is to avoid potential, personal offense.

While the Intramuralist would never intend to offend, there exists a sensitive recognition that some things are harder for each of us to hear. Hard to hear, however, does not automatically prompt need for political correctness. Case in point: “Dear Future Mom”…

Earlier in 2016, Down Syndrome International released a video to commemorate World Down Syndrome Day. DSi and its American affiliates are organizations precious to this parent’s heart. Their two minute commercial, no less, featured a soon-to-be mother asking “what kind of life” her future child might have. Young people from all over the world — with Down syndrome — answer her with a poignant, contagious purity in their expression.

Said one articulate teen:

“Don’t be afraid. Your child will be able to do many things. He’ll be able to hug you; he’ll be able to run towards you; he’ll be able to speak, and tell you he loves you; he’ll be able to go to school like everybody…”

Then said the narrator, near the end:

“Sometimes, it will be difficult; very difficult; almost impossible — but isn’t it like that for all mothers? Dear future mom, your child can be happy, just like I am — and you’ll be happy, too.”

The commercial ends with sweet shots of the kids hugging their parents… lots of smiles… lots of joy. Said one commentator: “It’s a profound and incredible tribute to the love that parents have for their special needs children.”

As the parent of a son with Down syndrome, I can attest that such expressions are consistent with my personal experience.

However, in France, the ad was prohibited. In fact — flying well below the holiday radar (with the season of merriment serving as an expedient time to release controversial rulings or contentious news), the ban was recently upheld by the French State Council, claiming the commercial is unfit for television because it’s “likely to disturb the conscience of women who had lawfully made different personal life choices.”

In other words, the commercial was prohibited on French television because of the possibility that women who aborted their children due to a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome may be offended; they may feel uncomfortable if exposed to such a message.

So let me be clear. And let me be equally honest and sensitive. There is no intentional shame via the Intramuralist. There is also no avoidance of the truth.

The truth is that the quality of life of a person with Down syndrome does not have to be any lesser; any perception that it is somehow worse, is more in our preconceived minds than in their reality. Just like the rest of us, persons with Down’s have the potential to thrive, grow, and find great, great joy. That is the truth.

However, in our efforts to offend no one, it seems we often choose to avoid or offend someone. We aren’t always good at wrestling with the truth.

Respectfully…
AR

12/20/2016

the conclusion of our diverse roundtable

[What a treat to spend extended time with these 6 individuals. What a growth opportunity to be sharpened by those who don’t all think the same as me. Here is the end of our 5 part series, as articulated by Brent, Janie, Mike, Roni, Ronnie, and Ruth, and their recognition of intentional respect as the first, best step forward…]
_____

AR: Ok, friends — and that’s what you are… I so appreciate how each of you recognizes that friendship and relationship are more important than agreement and likemindedness. Give me some final thoughts as we wrap this up (although I have a sneaky suspicion we may keep talking…).

BRENT: Nobody reads BOOKS anymore! I see so many people my age (31) and younger completely detached from the mechanics of real learning or study. I read a note today that summed it up well, saying, “We educate to the point of accepting what we’ve been taught, but not enough to question it.”

RONI: This group is a group of readers. The number of bookstores that have gone out of business is incredible. Very sad. Many read on-line, but sadly many done. I think you make a good point.

MIKE: In the spirit of what Ann is promoting here, I’ll put myself out there. Why is it assumed because I am conservative that I am evil, greedy, prejudiced, and/or don’t care about people in need? Because I assure you, none are true.

RONI: Likewise, as being termed liberal, why am I seen as wasteful, soft on crime, not a real Christian, and unpatriotic?

AR: Why are people so judgmental of political identifications?

MIKE: Equally fair questions, Roni, though I do not equate politics with crime, religion, or patriotism.

RUTH: I’m with Mike, in that I despise the way people have treated others, as in the stories shared here of assumptions and hateful treatment toward others. The only way I know to conceptualize why there’s so much judgment is because we’re in a fallen world, awaiting us unifying, while an enemy stirs up division and strife. If one has received mercy from the Creator, even in disagreement, empathy is possible toward “opposing sides.”

RONI: Empathy or a lack there of plays a significant role. Seeing if someone who seems so different from you has the same value but through a different lens is critical.

MIKE: This has been great conversation. This is the way our political discourse should be. And Congress. It could be, if we could focus on everyone winning rather than our side winning. We all lose when we won’t let the other side win.
_____

Our conversation actually covered far more, fascinating ground. We went on to respectfully discuss the following, although arguably each to a limited extent:

Why a person is conservative
Why a person is liberal
Why it is inaccurate to identify conservatives as “angry, white males”
Why it is inaccurate to label either party/partisans as either “meaner” or “kinder” than another
“Hateful attitudes” on both sides
The sadness and potential hate in “unfriending”
Voting for the person as opposed to party
Russian involvement/WikiLeaks
The burden of our $19 trillion debt
States rights
The role of the federal government — how big should it be?
Economic analysis of the Carrier deal
North Carolina
The value/concerns of privatization — including education
Perceived economic differences
Populist candidates
Potential cabinet nominations and appointees
Racism, socialism, elitism, etc.
The wide, bipartisan respect for Colin Powell
The power that accompanies wealth
The Electoral College
William F. Buckley
If the current Dem. and Rep. parties are consistent with their predecessors
Putting down our labels
How “everybody is right and everybody is wrong”
How true conservatives and true liberals are alike and often agree on concepts
Where we each get our news
The Chicago Cubs and more.

There was generous affirmation, questions, and respect, finding more we had in common than did not. We get into trouble when we magnify the “did not’s.” So allow me to close with a couple more comments from the table…

MIKE: Sounds like lots of agreement here. If we could unite in purpose, I think we could figure out how to get there.

RONI: I think this group could find enough agreement to make things work fairly for all.

RUTH: I appreciate the hope and value each of you all have brought to the table. I am thankful for the ability, as upside down as the world is, to still reach across and shake hands, and show care, concern, and hope.

Agreed… and amen.

Respectfully…
AR

12/18/2016

a diverse roundtable – part 4 of 5

[Over the past week, we’ve posted excerpts from a conversation with 6 diverse individuals: Brent, Janie, Mike, Roni, Ronnie, and Ruth. Each recognizes intentional respect as the first, best step forward in the polarized, political environment in which we live. Here is the second to last piece of our conversation, with the conclusion coming Tuesday…]
_____

AR: We’ve referenced a need to “overcome” — overcoming a nastiness on all sides… from the ugliness, hatred, arrogance… even from sides thinking they are “all in the right” and another is “all in the wrong.” How do we actually overcome? How do we “overcome someday”?

MIKE: I used to think the goal was a color-blind society. I no longer believe that. Racism exists, so we need to deal with it. I ask my black friends what it’s like, how they get looked at, and how I can help. I think it starts there — we all need diverse friends. We can’t understand what it’s like to be black, Hispanic, gay, liberal, or conservative until we sincerely get to know people who are.

RUTH: We need to recognize we are in this together. We need more intentional communication across lines of diversity, yes — and pursuing opportunity to grow in understanding, wisdom, and synergy.

JANIE: With my diverse friends, there is no subject we won’t talk about. We talk about what we don’t understand. I keep coming back to Ecclesiastes 3, said in Hebrew and English after the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007…. “a time to be born, a time to die, a time to plant, a time to pluck up that which is planted, a time to heal, a time to build up, a time to weep, a time to laugh, a time to dance, a time to embrace, a time to lose, a time to keep, a time to keep silence, a time to speak, a time to love, a time of peace… So perhaps wisdom comes with those words. Learning to listen… to walk in another’s shoes…

AR: So how do people fuel the division, even though they may not realize it? And is there ever a time to severe a relationship over political differences?

MIKE: Our language fuels division. Why is white always good, and black bad? White hat, dark side, blackball, etc. Calling myself pro-life implies you are against life. Calling yourself progressive implies I am against progress.
I never sever relationships. But I have blocked people on Facebook so I don’t have to listen to their incessant rants.

JANIE: I don’t severe relationships over political differences.

RUTH: I can’t see severing a relationship over political differences. As a respected leader in my life often says, “We don’t often get 100% agreement over things in our own household!” Life is full of negotiating differences in relationships. Political differences may go deep, but I hope relationships go deeper.
We all have reasons behind our political leanings, which always have the possibility to change. If we cut each other off rather than try to understand and graciously express reasons for our position — or at least discuss how to work together for the common good — doesn’t that in itself inadvertently perpetuate division?

Seems to me, if we are not intentional, we can fuel division by default. Unless we make efforts to stay open to listening — and if we don’t look for opportunities to reach across barriers to connect, then our circles of association will continue to drift further apart. If not intentional to search past our comfort zone of associates most like us, then social media feeds us our separate preferences, ingraining them further.

Also fueling division: presenting our opinions as judgments and labels against others — and in a manner lacking humility, mercy, and love even, for persons with opposing views.

RONI: So what can be done?
1. Recognize there are issues.
2. Create safe spaces, like this, for respectful discussion of solutions; solutions often take a long time.
3. Recognize that as you discuss there needs to be follow-up, because healing takes time.
4. Seek to understand the meaning and intent of others.
5. Respond with kindness when possible.
6. Understand that protests are not bad but part of the change process.
7. Value the first amendment while understanding your words/actions have consequences.

AR: How still is social media making this worse?

JANIE: Facebook tries to tell me I don’t know what I am talking about, even when I live here, witnessing reality. It incites the ugly and mean.

MIKE: So many ways, social media makes this worse. Fake news, anonymous trolling, etc. And with so many news sources, outlets seek out the extreme to get attention. But the biggest issue is being able to filter out news sources to see only what we want to see. We are continually reinforcing our own viewpoint without seeking to understand others.

RONI: Mike, I think you are right. We do give more grace to those we understand. We all tend to discount others. Part of that is the Western practice of only seeing things as right/wrong or good/evil.
_____

Recognizing that one “side” is not all good or all evil — encouraging each of us to seek to understand others first.

Great discussion. Our conclusion comes Tuesday…

Respectfully…
AR

12/15/2016

a diverse roundtable – part 3

[The conversation continues with Brent, Janie, Mike, Roni, Ronnie, and Ruth… 6 diverse individuals who recognize intentional respect as the first, best step forward.]
_____

AR: So let me ask a question. When someone doesn’t share your stated fears or concerns, how do you work with that? How do you talk to him/her?

RONI: Often by what someone doesn’t say, you can ask questions to understand someone’s fears.

JANIE: Am I the only one in the “south” or close enough to understand the Confederate Flag remains a serious way of life? Not making fun of it. I’m saying that there exist regional influences. Hence, are the fears different depending on the region where we live?

AR: Great question, Janie. And whether we relate or not, share them or not, what should be our approach?

MIKE: First, I acknowledge that the fears are real, sincere, and not contrived. Then I would offer the hope that the demonizing in which both sides portrayed the other was probably worse than reality.

RONI: As far as the “fear factor,” it is real. It’s like the the reality my two sons face when dealing with police and others is very different. (I’m not against the police and am not saying they are bad.) One son is white, and one son is bi-racial and very brown. However, my “brown” son has been harassed when he was doing nothing. I truly fear for his safety. Both parties may have demonized, but there was an unleashed meanness that is real. I appreciate your perspective Mike, but am afraid Pandora’s box is opened and can’t be closed.

MIKE: I do think the demonizing exceeded reality, but I also recognize some ugly elements of society that embraced the candidates, and the candidates did not denounce them, because they wanted the votes. I certainly hope they don’t govern that way, but acknowledge that remains to be seen. Skinheads are not going to rule this country. The vast majority of us oppose that.

JANIE: Roni — Pandora’s Box! Thank you. I could NOT find that in my brain cell!

RUTH: That’s another shock — the seeming permission given (or taken) for an unleashing of such hidden ugliness and nastiness. I am shocked to hear those reports from here and there. The fears I can understand, but I hoped in reality we were past so much of the racism etc. as a society!
Has the perception of being disregarded, some thinking self-righteously that “since the constitution and executive powers have been overstepped,” they are justified in now ugly backlash unleashed? … by a “minority of the majority”? WAY too many bad stories. The only hope I take is that at least, like puss oozing from an infection, maybe now it’s out, we can begin to deal with it.

MIKE: Just as MLK taught, folks, we overcome hate with love. So as this ugly element of society feels more comfortable coming out into the open, let us be loving rather than hateful toward each other.

RUTH: Agree! We shall overcome… someday!

RONI: I agree.

JANIE: Forceful denunciation is missing — can’t come together when “you” are insulting the people with whom you want to become friends. I suggest re-reading Reconstruction and the Northern treatment of the South.

RONI: Ubuntu is missing. So is the concept of ichi-go-ichi-e. Heard an interesting movie line that seems to sum “thangs” up for the political parties:
Little Rascal one: “Why don’t you look where you’re going?”
Little Rascal two: Why don’t you go where you’re lookin’.”
I think this applies to both parties.
Both parties have ideology which diminishes healthy dialogue. I appreciate AR’s reaching out to lead to understanding, not necessarily agreement, but at least a way to provide a vehicle to deeper insight.

Learning styles and exposure of people’s life trauma seems to have been amplified by this election cycle with no healing mechanisms. You just don’t “get over” the opened wounds brought out this election.

RUTH: I, too am so blessed by a diverse network of family friends. I’d love to hear more definition of the concepts you mentioned, Roni. What do they mean personally to you?

AR: Yes, Roni… “ichi-go-ichi-e”?

RONI: “Ubuntu” — cooperation. I lift you and you lift me. “Ichi-gu-ichi-e” — one time, one meeting.
Only get today. Make the most of each new experience. Reconciliation hearings were painful but honest.

JANIE: WOW! Roni, we would be BFF’s!
_____

[It’s amazing what respectful dialogue can do.]

More soon in regard to how we overcome, how we each fuel division, and some specific insights. Two more posts. Stay tuned.

Respectfully…
AR