What can we, as individual US citizens do to improve the division (non-political)

[Ginevra]

Please do not devolve into politics. I want this post to stay here where more citizens of the US or smart people in other countries can contribute. 

Whatever ultimately happens with the election, it is clear we have a very serious national problem with ideology, extreme views, and an inability to discuss *anything* in a temperate and intelligent manner. (I don’t mean there’s no such thing; I just mean the national narratives on the whole.) What can we, as ordinary individuals, do to move this in a better direction? Any ideas? 

I do think Social Media is contributing to the problem, but I am also not certain that measured, intelligent voices bailing Facebook and leaving it for the wolves is doing us a favor in the national scope. (I say this even though I have been leaving FB to the wolves...I wonder if I am feeding the problem instead of the solution.) I know medical people who gave up several months ago, for instance, trying to quell COVID conspiracies. I understand *why* they would give up - plus who’s got time for that? - but I wonder if that’s merely making the baseless nonsense proliferate unchecked. 

What can we, as ordinary individuals, do to move our country in a more unified, kinder, less partisan/identity-driven direction? 

[hshibley]

I think we need move civic involvement. The more people work together to improve their community the more we will be unified as a country regardless of political affiliation. Joining League of Women Voters, delivering Home Delivered Meals, volunteering with Boy Scouts or Girl Scout, PTA, food banks etc. gets us out of our silos and working together. Working towards a goal together that is not defined by Democrats vs Republicans let’s people get to know each other in a more neutral environment. I think the death of civic involvement as a natural default for adults is a major contributor to this us vs them attitude. 

[Hyacinth]

My current (albeit imperfect) attempts:

• Listen to people. Really listen. Not to better argue my own point but simply to understand.  
• Avoid (and recognize and call out) dehumanizing and demonizing characterizations of others (CovIdiots, morons, libtards, Nazis, etc.).
• Turn off the social media. Just let it go. Don’t feed it with my views and clicks and likes and comments. (I do still scroll at least once or twice a day, but I’d love to cut it out entirely. It offers some value, but I’m continually weighing the cost.)
• Find common ground. I had a conversation with a relative about her state’s current rules around Covid. Our opinions differed greatly. Regardless, I made sure the conversation didn’t end there. I asked about her sick dog. We talked about holiday plans. We wished each other well. (This goes back to the humanizing thing.)
• Get out of the bubble. Read a different (thoughtful) columnist. Watch a different news channel. And do it with a posture of “what can I learn here?” not “let’s see how screwed up they are.”

There’s more, but I’ll end my early morning ramblings here. Looking forward to others‘ thoughts. Thanks for asking the question, Quill. 

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Hyacinth

[hshibley]

9 minutes ago, Happymomof1 said:

I agree, but in the age of Covid this is pretty impossible to do.  I mean even if you volunteer, you will be masked, keeping 6 feet apart and doing things as quickly as possible. Before Covid, you could go and you would pack boxes, hand out meals and actually TALK to people and LISTEN to people. Not now. To be safe, you limit exposure.  My thesis if you will is that part of the reason the division is so awful right now is that we are not getting together with others. We barely do so with people in our own "tribe," much less would someone not in your tribe risk exposure to have an extended conversation.

I live in a state where COVID is pretty rampant. Meals on Wheels are still being delivered scouts still need volunteers etc. the only place not welcoming in person volunteers are schools but pta still needs behind the scenes volunteers. If there’s a will there’s a way. COVID is going to be an issue for a long while social distancing masks etc are going to be a way of life for a while if people want to connect with their community they can work to find a way. 

[Momto6inIN]

Just talking to people and really listening with an attitude to learn and understand, not convince. When I look at my neighbors and people in my community, they are (almost) all good, worthwhile, sincere people. I may not agree with them on policy and none of us (including me) are perfect. We all have hidden and no so hidden biases and we all have blind spots and shortcomings and mine aren't less bad than anybody else's. I know very, very, very few people that I would classify as so bigoted or extreme or sinful or insert-negative-adjective-here that I feel uncomfortable being around them at all. When we listen to the media and Facebook and even these boards sometimes we can starting feel like the "other side" is a faceless nameless bunch of awful people. But when we look into the faces of real people in our real communities, the vast majority are not like that. A little humility goes a long way.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Happymomof1 said:

No, I know you can volunteer. That is not what I meant. But our food pantry has severely limited the volunteering. Even though you are volunteering, you are NOT INTERACTING with other volunteers or the people you serve. It is as quick as possible. Yes, they are still happening, but that will not help the discourse because there is no true interaction if that makes sense.

You raise a worthwhile point. It is more difficult in the COVID era, if only because there is less discourse. There is even much less physical touching, and we know from studies that it releases endorphins to hug/shake hands/touch others. Or sharing food: it’s not good in the pandemic but it is normally a huge symbol solidifying bonds between people. 
With that said, I do think we can come up with creative solutions. It’s the reason I put up this post. 🙂 

[Pawz4me]

Put more emphasis on teaching critical thinking skills. And start young.

[Not_a_Number]

9 minutes ago, Momto6inIN said:

But when we look into the faces of real people in our real communities, the vast majority are not like that. A little humility goes a long way.

But sadly, that is no guarantee that they wouldn’t press a button that would kill a million people somewhere far away. That’s the tragedy of our lizard brains.

I don’t know, @Quill. I don’t know that I’m striving towards “lack of division” and not something else. I’m someone who highly prizes communication with everyone, but at the end of the day, what I really want is just to feel safe. 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

But sadly, that is no guarantee that they wouldn’t press a button that would kill a million people somewhere far away. That’s the tragedy of our lizard brains.

I don’t know, @Quill. I don’t know that I’m striving towards “lack of division” and not something else. I’m someone who highly prizes communication with everyone, but at the end of the day, what I really want is just to feel safe. 

I think less division does lead to greater security. I think this was in a book by Stephen R. Covey, though I have forgotten the details, but the author was talking about maintaining a friendship with one's children and he said something like, "It is hard to sin against your best buddy." Well, I agree with that. 

Fortunately "safety" is a value that almost all Americans (humans, even) hold in common. Shared values help bridge divisions. (And blah, blah, blah a bunch of political stuff I won't say about people trying to achieve a feeling of "safety" in harmful ways.) 

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, Quill said:

I think less division does lead to greater security. I think this was in a book by Stephen R. Covey, though I have forgotten the details, but the author was talking about maintaining a friendship with one's children and he said something like, "It is hard to sin against your best buddy." Well, I agree with that. 

Fortunately "safety" is a value that almost all Americans (humans, even) hold in common. Shared values help bridge divisions. (And blah, blah, blah a bunch of political stuff I won't say about people trying to achieve a feeling of "safety" in harmful ways.) 

I’m afraid of making this too political. But I think you can actually successfully unite people over awful, inhumane policies as well as good policies. There are not statistically enough of me in the US to feel like decreasing division will necessarily serve me well.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I’m afraid of making this too political. But I think you can actually successfully unite people over awful, inhumane policies as well as good policies. There are not statistically enough of me in the US to feel like decreasing division will necessarily serve me well.

Thank you; please don't make it too political. I agree that you can successfully unite people over awful, inhumane policies. Sadly, that is historically verifiable. 

But, probably because I am a relentless optimist and a die-hard idealist, I do not think all is lost. Grave? Yes. But lost? No. It's why I have the McCain quote in my siggy. "Nothing is inevitable here." 

[SereneHome]

1 hour ago, Hyacinth said:

My current (albeit imperfect) attempts:

• Listen to people. Really listen. Not to better argue my own point but simply to understand.  
• Avoid (and recognize and call out) dehumanizing and demonizing characterizations of others (CovIdiots, morons, libtards, Nazis, etc.).
• Turn off the social media. Just let it go. Don’t feed it with my views and clicks and likes and comments. (I do still scroll at least once or twice a day, but I’d love to cut it out entirely. It offers some value, but I’m continually weighing the cost.)
• Find common ground. I had a conversation with a relative about her state’s current rules around Covid. Our opinions differed greatly. Regardless, I made sure the conversation didn’t end there. I asked about her sick dog. We talked about holiday plans. We wished each other well. (This goes back to the humanizing thing.)
• Get out of the bubble. Read a different (thoughtful) columnist. Watch a different news channel. And do it with a posture of “what can I learn here?” not “let’s see how screwed up they are.”

There’s more, but I’ll end my early morning ramblings here. Looking forward to others‘ thoughts. Thanks for asking the question, Quill. 

 

 

 

Excellent, Excellent list.

Everything you said boils down to the simple thing - treat people with respect and a little bit of kindness. Doesn't it sound simple? Don't we expect 5 yr olds to behave this way?  And yet, here we are, adults, have completely lost that ability.

Also, when ever I get into things with other people, my dad always tells me - start with yourself. Look at your actions first, What could YOU have done better, differently, what lesson you should have learned. Don't worry about other people's behavior, worry about your own and do the right thing. I think people are too busy telling others what to do and how to live and don't look at themselves. Start with yourself.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, SereneHome said:

Excellent, Excellent list.

Everything you said boils down to the simple thing - treat people with respect and a little bit of kindness. Doesn't it sound simple? Don't we expect 5 yr olds to behave this way?  And yet, here we are, adults, have completely lost that ability.

Also, when ever I get into things with other people, my dad always tells me - start with yourself. Look at your actions first, What could YOU have done better, differently, what lesson you should have learned. Don't worry about other people's behavior, worry about your own and do the right thing. I think people are too busy telling others what to do and how to live and don't look at themselves. Start with yourself.

 

I love your dad's advice. It is so good to remember this.

 

 

[SereneHome]

Just now, Quill said:

I love your dad's advice. It is so good to remember this.

 

 

He is so so smart and yet so humble. I don't always agree with him on everything, but just seeing how he handles things is a huge lesson

[Not_a_Number]

9 minutes ago, Quill said:

Thank you; please don't make it too political. I agree that you can successfully unite people over awful, inhumane policies. Sadly, that is historically verifiable. 

But, probably because I am a relentless optimist and a die-hard idealist, I do not think all is lost. Grave? Yes. But lost? No. It's why I have the McCain quote in my siggy. "Nothing is inevitable here." 

I don’t think anything is inevitable. I just don’t know that “lack of division” is the right goal.

Coming back to the question, I think the best thing to do is to work on having interest-based communities that aren’t split by politics. I love this board, because it has a range of people. FB has been terrible for that, though, because it’s so fast and so hard to moderate that most groups become unable to tolerate any kind of dissent. It really encourages black and white thinking.

The FB group I used to run currently has an incredible number of “progressive” rules with no dissent allowed. (Like, not using the word “crazy” to describe situations, and there’s lots where that came from.) I find that kind of environment very unhelpful.

Edited November 6, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Soror]

I think staying away from Social Media, it is designed to create division. It shows you want you want to see, whether or not it is true. More often than not in this political season it makes people stupid and mean. If you can be just on to catch up with people great, otherwise you are running the risk of having it warp your views in ways that are not good.

Fact check things that you read, especially if they are really outrageous.

Read a wide variety of news sources, from all over the world.

Remember the things you like about someone.

Don't focus on disagreements but what unites us. 

I've unfollowed everyone on FB months ago, I am so very, very happy that I'm not going through this election with SM commentary and BS adding to my stress.

And if the election falls where it is looking it will fall it would be good for everyone to remember how they felt last election, treat others how you wanted to be treated, remember your reaction and treat those on the opposite with the kindness you wish you received from the opposite last time.

[Garga]

Have to post and run, and can’t even fully enter the conversation:  

I read this post before popping in the shower and while I was in there, I had a thought:

Are we divided? How do we know? In what ways are we divided? Where is the division coming from the most?

I was thinking that we seem so divided because this election is so close. But is it that close? How close are other elections? This one feels particularly divisive because it’s taking so long to count the votes because a pandemic changed the way we vote.

I don’t have time, but if someone else does, I’d love to know what the results were of the last 10 elections. How big of a margin did each person win/lose by? Did it come down to electoral college votes vs what the people really wanted?

 

Then, if it turns out that we actually are not much more divided than in the past (and I honestly don’t know if that’s true or not), what makes it *feel* like we’re more divided?

Is it because we are watching different news sources?

Is it because we rile each other up on SM?

 

Depending on why we *are more divided or why we *feel more divided would perhaps change how to deal with it. 

If we’re divided because of news sources, then as an individual, we could take time to watch/read the other side and try to understand where that news source is coming from.

If we’re divided because we rile each other up on sm, then perhaps we join sm and don’t necessarily read everything and get riled up ourselves, but we go on and post moderate/calming ideas on there to help break up echo chambers.

 

Ok...my ideas aren’t really fully thought through.  I’m still in the middle of trying to wrangle this hair into a presentable mess and then immediately have hours of school stuff to do.  Just thought I’d toss them out there.  When I get the chance, I’m going to try to figure out the results of the past 10 or 20 elections and compare them to this one.

Edited November 6, 2020 by Garga

[Garga]

dp

Edited November 6, 2020 by Garga

[Garga]

tp

Edited November 6, 2020 by Garga

[KeriJ]

I definitely would like to unpack the idea of staying off social media and just leaving it to the wolves as opposed to sticking around attempting to add to the voices of reason.  It's something that I ponder daily and haven't figured out yet. 

[Junie]

7 minutes ago, Garga said:

 

I don’t have time, but if someone else does, I’d love to know what the results were of the last 10 elections. How big of a margin did each person win/lose by? Did it come down to electoral college votes vs what the people really wanted?

 

 

So, last night I had the same question about previous elections and I found this website.  It has a color-coded electoral map for every presidential election.

https://www.270towin.com/historical-presidential-elections/timeline/

[Junie]

I think that part of the problem is that people who are on extreme ends of the red/blue spectrum think that *everyone* is on an extreme end.  They think that everyone is a radical.  

I really think that getting out of the echo chambers is key to success in this area.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Junie said:

I think that part of the problem is that people who are on extreme ends of the red/blue spectrum think that *everyone* is on an extreme end.  They think that everyone is a radical.  

I really think that getting out of the echo chambers is key to success in this area.

Beyond this, my general observation is that fewer people think they are on the far end of either spectrum, than actually are. I know people who *think* they are moderate but their beliefs track with people far to one side. Therefore, they don't think they are in a problematic position. They just think they are in the "normal" position. 

[KeriJ]

2 minutes ago, Quill said:

Beyond this, my general observation is that fewer people think they are on the far end of either spectrum, than actually are. I know people who *think* they are moderate but their beliefs track with people far to one side. Therefore, they don't think they are in a problematic position. They just think they are in the "normal" position. 

I think this is absolutely true.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, KeriJ said:

I definitely would like to unpack the idea of staying off social media and just leaving it to the wolves as opposed to sticking around attempting to add to the voices of reason.  It's something that I ponder daily and haven't figured out yet. 

I ponder that, too. I am positive that for myself, individually, my break from FB of the past 2-ish months has paid off hugely in personal peace. I am very sensitive to discord and being off FB quiets all the noise. So it is good for myself personally.

But I did notice that earlier in the pandemic that "all the smart people left". My friends who are in medical and biology fields just quit. And that seemed to be about the same time that the COVID memes just went to crazy-town. 

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, Quill said:

I ponder that, too. I am positive that for myself, individually, my break from FB of the past 2-ish months has paid off hugely in personal peace. I am very sensitive to discord and being off FB quiets all the noise. So it is good for myself personally.

But I did notice that earlier in the pandemic that "all the smart people left". My friends who are in medical and biology fields just quit. And that seemed to be about the same time that the COVID memes just went to crazy-town. 

I think it’s not reasonable to expect people to have to fight and fight. Unfortunately, conspiracy theorists always have more time and energy than you do. 

[Hyacinth]

5 minutes ago, Junie said:

I think that part of the problem is that people who are on extreme ends of the red/blue spectrum think that *everyone* is on an extreme end.  They think that everyone is a radical.  

I really think that getting out of the echo chambers is key to success in this area.

Yes! In my list I mentioned reading commentary from “the other side.”

I actually went back and added the word “thoughtful” because too much of what constitutes “the other side” is really inflammatory and not representative of real people. There’s no nuance. 

Someone a while ago started a thread about a podcast with David French. A poster here listened and commented with surprise that David French, a self-described conservative Christian, could be so reasonable and thoughtful. I think that happens all the time! Someone hears venty soundbites—often out of context—and ascribes all kinds of nefarious intent and negative qualities to that person AND everyone who then references that person. 
 

Wasn’t there a thread recently that asked people for suggestions of writers/commenters in today’s political and social world? 

[Guest]

@Junie Thanks for that fascinating map. I could waste hours on that! 😄

@Garga I appreciate your willingness to investigate the rhetoric of "we are so divided, more than ever". Junie's linked map is good for really understanding, I think, and I hope to spend some time on it today. 

However, I *have* seen, way before the current election, charts that show political temperature in the country going back to, I don't know, maybe the 50s. I'll see if I can dig up the charts I am referring to. In those charts there used to be a large overlap of people who were moderate, no matter their affiliation. But now there is very little overlap. It's like two mountains with a valley of no overlap in between. 

I think the availability of identity "news" and memes and junk both increases the perception of division and leads to actual division. 

[Soror]

11 minutes ago, Quill said:

Beyond this, my general observation is that fewer people think they are on the far end of either spectrum, than actually are. I know people who *think* they are moderate but their beliefs track with people far to one side. Therefore, they don't think they are in a problematic position. They just think they are in the "normal" position. 

LOL yes, it has happened here many times, someone posted an article they deemed moderate that was anything but.

[KeriJ]

Just now, Quill said:

I ponder that, too. I am positive that for myself, individually, my break from FB of the past 2-ish months has paid off hugely in personal peace. I am very sensitive to discord and being off FB quiets all the noise. So it is good for myself personally.

But I did notice that earlier in the pandemic that "all the smart people left". My friends who are in medical and biology fields just quit. And that seemed to be about the same time that the COVID memes just went to crazy-town. 

One of the things that happened for me is that I stayed off for awhile.  Then when I peeked back in, I was horrified to see some of the views of people with whom I interact in real life on a regular basis.  It never would have occurred to me that they would believe the conspiracy theories and other extreme stuff out there. 

I can't decide if ignorance is bliss or if it's better to know the truth about someone.  I do know that seeing things on social media has dramatically affected some in person relationships. 

Like you said earlier,  many people don't believe they are extreme.  I think many of them just assume I see things the way they do. So is it worth it to stay on social media and at least gently add to the more balanced voices? But is it worth the cost of my own peace? 

Still pondering.

 

[Guest]

P.S. *This board today...I'm going to get carpal tunnel from moving my Complaint bracelet from wrist to wrist. 

[Guest]

dp See?

Edited November 6, 2020 by Quill

[Pawz4me]

42 minutes ago, Quill said:

Beyond this, my general observation is that fewer people think they are on the far end of either spectrum, than actually are. I know people who *think* they are moderate but their beliefs track with people far to one side. Therefore, they don't think they are in a problematic position. They just think they are in the "normal" position. 

I think we've seen something like this repeatedly on this very board. There have been several posts from people claiming to be moderate/centrist/unbiased and yet the links they post as things they agree with have often been very biased. I've yet to figure out if those posters truly believe they're centrist/unbiased or if it's a type of trolling. That's very hard to sort out.

[Frances]

I’ve posted this sentiment before, but pay for and use primarily media sources that are consistently rated center and reliable and encourage others to do the same, preferably print sources, as I think they are less likely to inflame emotions. While I do think reading a variety of sources is good, when a significant chunk of people are primarily consuming biased or extremely biased video and/or audio sources, I don’t think some people reading a variety of sources will make any measurable dent. We’ve had a thread the last few weeks on the politics board about opposing political views between spouses, and consumption of primarily or exclusively biased sources seems to play a big role in the inability to really communicate about politics because people are not starting with the same set of facts.

I agree with the social media problem others have already mentioned. This is my only social media, so I don’t really see what goes on out there on Facebook, Twitter, etc., I mainly hear about it on these boards. But when it comes to politics, it sounds like a big echo chamber.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, Momto6inIN said:

Just talking to people and really listening with an attitude to learn and understand, not convince. When I look at my neighbors and people in my community, they are (almost) all good, worthwhile, sincere people. I may not agree with them on policy and none of us (including me) are perfect. We all have hidden and no so hidden biases and we all have blind spots and shortcomings and mine aren't less bad than anybody else's. I know very, very, very few people that I would classify as so bigoted or extreme or sinful or insert-negative-adjective-here that I feel uncomfortable being around them at all. When we listen to the media and Facebook and even these boards sometimes we can starting feel like the "other side" is a faceless nameless bunch of awful people. But when we look into the faces of real people in our real communities, the vast majority are not like that. A little humility goes a long way.

While I believe in theory with what you are saying, history has repeatedly shown us that lots of good, worthwhile, sincere people can condone and do terrible things, especially when following terrible leaders. 

[Not_a_Number]

11 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’ve posted this sentiment before, but pay for and use primarily media sources that are consistently rated center and reliable and encourage others to do the same, preferably print sources, as I think they are less likely to inflame emotions. While I do think reading a variety of sources is good, when a significant chunk of people are primarily consuming biased or extremely biased video and/or audio sources, I don’t think some people reading a variety of sources will make any measurable dent. We’ve had a thread the last few weeks on the politics board about opposing political views between spouses, and consumption of primarily or exclusively biased sources seems to play a big role in the inability to really communicate about politics because people are not starting with the same set of facts.

Propaganda works. It just does. 

[Guest]

@Garga Here is a site with a chart like the one I am remembering. I didn't read or vet the entire article. 

https://www.newcapitalmgmt.com/news/americas-political-divide

[Frances]

1 hour ago, Junie said:

I think that part of the problem is that people who are on extreme ends of the red/blue spectrum think that *everyone* is on an extreme end.  They think that everyone is a radical.  

I really think that getting out of the echo chambers is key to success in this area.

I also think part of the problem is people sometimes seeing things as red vs blue when it is actually about much more fundamental principles. Because when things are presented as R vs D and we buy into that due to social media, leaders, and/or news sources, then there can be a failure to see the forest through the trees. So what could be uniting most of is instead dividing us. It goes back to something Not-a-Number regularly encourages and I believe is important and that is to set your own goal posts and make sure you are being consistent regardless of which “side” is acting (she says it better of course).

Edited November 6, 2020 by Frances

[Junie]

1 hour ago, KeriJ said:

 

I can't decide if ignorance is bliss or if it's better to know the truth about someone.  I do know that seeing things on social media has dramatically affected some in person relationships. 

 

 

I definitely fall in the ignorance is bliss category.  For instance, my sister is very vocal about her politics, so I know where she stands on most issues, but my brother is quieter.  I don't know where he stands on most things, don't know who he voted for.  And it doesn't matter to me.

A few years ago I saw a news clip of man getting tossed from a rally.  I thought it was my brother.  And I didn't know if he was at that rally to support or protest the candidate. (Edit: it wasn't my brother being thrown from the rally, but it looked like him -- 30 something, plaid shirt, beard) 😉

I really think we need to stop caring what other people believe politically.

I know that we are trying to keep this thread/board non-political -- I think that's kind of where we need to be with our real-life relationships as well.

Edited November 6, 2020 by Junie

[Little Green Leaves]

Coming at this from a slightly different perspective...

I live in an area where there is virtually no political division. Almost everyone votes the same way. Almost everyone I know is upset about politics and is angry at the other side...but there's no other side to talk to, or to argue with, or anything. 

Unfortunately, one result of this is a lack of self-criticism. It is way too easy for people to think in terms of us and them, and to put all the blame for everything on "them." Easy to have straw men take the blame for things.

I'm not on Facebook, but even some of the chats I'm in are getting really shrill. People are upset but there's no way to work out the anger. 

[Momto6inIN]

3 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

But sadly, that is no guarantee that they wouldn’t press a button that would kill a million people somewhere far away. That’s the tragedy of our lizard brains.

I don’t know, @Quill. I don’t know that I’m striving towards “lack of division” and not something else. I’m someone who highly prizes communication with everyone, but at the end of the day, what I really want is just to feel safe. 

But the same panic instincts and desire for security exist in all people at all times in all cultures. They are not ideology specific. We have different opinions about how best to obtain security and what security looks like, but the same basic desire is in all of us. I think where the trouble comes is when we assume that because someone has different opinions about what security looks like, those other people must not care about the same things we care about. And most of the time, that's just not true. 

1 hour ago, Frances said:

While I believe in theory with what you are saying, history has repeatedly shown us that lots of good, worthwhile, sincere people can condone and do terrible things, especially when following terrible leaders. 

I know that's true. I don't want to minimize it. And learning from the mistakes of the past is so, so, so important. But those instances truly are aberrations. I refuse to live my life in suspicion of my neighbors that they might turn on me and sell me out to a corrupt government. That is exactly the kind of "othering" in people's thought processes that makes those types of situations more likely, not less.

Statistically it's a whole lot more likely that any one person would become part of the silent crowd condoning atrocities than that one person would become a victim of those atrocities. So it's a whole lot more helpful and productive to be looking to myself and examining myself for bias than in looking for it in my neighbors.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Momto6inIN said:

But the same panic instincts and desire for security exist in all people at all times in all cultures. They are not ideology specific. We have different opinions about how best to obtain security and what security looks like, but the same basic desire is in all of us. I think where the trouble comes is when we assume that because someone has different opinions about what security looks like, those other people must not care about the same things we care about. And most of the time, that's just not true. 

I am sure they care about the same things with respect to their own family. I have grave doubts about whether they care about MY family. 

Do you see what I’m saying? I’m sure they are all lovely people within the context of their communities. Will they protest if the government suddenly stops handing out Greencards or citizenships? Will they care if there’s a purge of Jews from universities? Will they protect ME? 

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, Momto6inIN said:

Statistically it's a whole lot more likely that any one person would become part of the silent crowd condoning atrocities than that one person would become a victim of those atrocities.

I’m very mindful of trying not to become part of that silent crowd. I agree that it’s the easiest thing in the world to do so. But is everyone else going to do the same thing? 

[J-rap]

I think we need to be part of groups that don't line up with our neatly defined selves.  Join a group a little outside of our comfort zone that brings in a variety of people with a common interest.  So, it might be a book club.  It might be volunteering at a homeless shelter.  Things we're interested in, but that will include people with varied backgrounds and opinions, different religious and political beliefs, different present circumstances.  We can get to know other types of people better, and learn to appreciate that even people who have vastly different opinions on some things actually have compassionate hearts, and hope for a lot of the same things we hope for in life.  Find the commonalities.

[Not_a_Number]

7 minutes ago, J-rap said:

I think we need to be part of groups that don't line up with our neatly defined selves.  Join a group a little outside of our comfort zone that brings in a variety of people with a common interest.  So, it might be a book club.  It might be volunteering at a homeless shelter.  Things we're interested in, but that will include people with varied backgrounds and opinions, different religious and political beliefs, different present circumstances.  We can get to know other types of people better, and learn to appreciate that even people who have vastly different opinions on some things actually have compassionate hearts, and hope for a lot of the same things we hope for in life.  Find the commonalities.

For me, my online groups serve that purpose.

[itsheresomewhere]

One thing that needs to start is realizing that people can have a different opinion than you and still be a good person.   I have personally seen this lately too much and don’t get it.  Why does it make someone a horrible person if they don’t agree with you.

The ability to listen, being able to read, understand, and determine the facts are becoming lost skills that is contributing to this.  

Edited November 6, 2020 by itsheresomewhere

[Momto6inIN]

20 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I am sure they care about the same things with respect to their own family. I have grave doubts about whether they care about MY family. 

Do you see what I’m saying? I’m sure they are all lovely people within the context of their communities. Will they protest if the government suddenly stops handing out Greencards or citizenships? Will they care if there’s a purge of Jews from universities? Will they protect ME? 

 

17 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I’m very mindful of trying not to become part of that silent crowd. I agree that it’s the easiest thing in the world to do so. But is everyone else going to do the same thing? 

I do see what you're saying. And to the extent I can - as a white Christian American born woman - I get it. I'm not saying I've never worried about it or that you're foolish to do so. But the post is asking what can we *do* about this divide. And IMO what we can *do* is stop worrying about what we can't control - other people's possible actions and motivations - and start working on what we can control - examining our own biases and our own "othering" behavior, making a conscious choice to reach out and listen to people we don't agree with and establish relationships in our community where we feel comfortable giving people (even and maybe especially the people on the other side) the benefit of the doubt.

[Lori D.]

- daily re-focus on gratitude, rather than what's wrong with the world
- assume the best about others, rather than attribute negative motivations
- look for ways to volunteer, help out, be kind where you are
- reserve judgment about others--we don't know what they may be dealing with or have had happen in their past, but they likely aren't doing / saying /being different just to annoy us or be oppositional:
- BE what you want to SEE -- in daily life, in whatever places and situations you find yourself, be the reconciliation, the harmony, the healing, the hope, that you want to to see and experience in our world

"Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in his moccasins. He who is present at a wrongdoing and does not lift a hand to prevent it, is as guilty as the wrongdoers. Great Spirit, help me never to judge another until I have walked in his moccasins." 

Here's an interesting 11-minute TED Talk by Celeste Headlee on "How Can We Have Civil Conversations With the Other Side?".
She also has a book: "We Need to Talk: How to Have Conversations that Matter".

[Pen]

4 hours ago, hshibley said:

I think we need move civic involvement. The more people work together to improve their community the more we will be unified as a country regardless of political affiliation. Joining League of Women Voters, delivering Home Delivered Meals, volunteering with Boy Scouts or Girl Scout, PTA, food banks etc. gets us out of our silos and working together. Working towards a goal together that is not defined by Democrats vs Republicans let’s people get to know each other in a more neutral environment. I think the death of civic involvement as a natural default for adults is a major contributor to this us vs them attitude. 

 

4 hours ago, Hyacinth said:

My current (albeit imperfect) attempts:

• Listen to people. Really listen. Not to better argue my own point but simply to understand.  
• Avoid (and recognize and call out) dehumanizing and demonizing characterizations of others (CovIdiots, morons, libtards, Nazis, etc.).
• Turn off the social media. Just let it go. Don’t feed it with my views and clicks and likes and comments. (I do still scroll at least once or twice a day, but I’d love to cut it out entirely. It offers some value, but I’m continually weighing the cost.)
• Find common ground. I had a conversation with a relative about her state’s current rules around Covid. Our opinions differed greatly. Regardless, I made sure the conversation didn’t end there. I asked about her sick dog. We talked about holiday plans. We wished each other well. (This goes back to the humanizing thing.)
• Get out of the bubble. Read a different (thoughtful) columnist. Watch a different news channel. And do it with a posture of “what can I learn here?” not “let’s see how screwed up they are.”

There’s more, but I’ll end my early morning ramblings here. Looking forward to others‘ thoughts. Thanks for asking the question, Quill. 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Momto6inIN said:

Just talking to people and really listening with an attitude to learn and understand, not convince. When I look at my neighbors and people in my community, they are (almost) all good, worthwhile, sincere people. I may not agree with them on policy and none of us (including me) are perfect. We all have hidden and no so hidden biases and we all have blind spots and shortcomings and mine aren't less bad than anybody else's. I know very, very, very few people that I would classify as so bigoted or extreme or sinful or insert-negative-adjective-here that I feel uncomfortable being around them at all. When we listen to the media and Facebook and even these boards sometimes we can starting feel like the "other side" is a faceless nameless bunch of awful people. But when we look into the faces of real people in our real communities, the vast majority are not like that. A little humility goes a long way.

 

All of these.

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

17 minutes ago, Momto6inIN said:

 

I do see what you're saying. And to the extent I can - as a white Christian American born woman - I get it. I'm not saying I've never worried about it or that you're foolish to do so. But the post is asking what can we *do* about this divide. And IMO what we can *do* is stop worrying about what we can't control - other people's possible actions and motivations - and start working on what we can control - examining our own biases and our own "othering" behavior, making a conscious choice to reach out and listen to people we don't agree with and establish relationships in our community where we feel comfortable giving people (even and maybe especially the people on the other side) the benefit of the doubt.

I’ve done it!! I do so much work talking to people who differ from me. I’m SO aware of my own actions and biases. You all know me. You know it’s true.

But what does it buy me? Will others do the same for me?

I’m not being political here. I just want to understand what I’m supposed to GET out of all this hard work.