How to Take the “Side” of Compassion while Working against Divisiveness: Creating a Nation United

          Recently I was accused of engaging with people in a way “which is removed from any side taking”. Although this does highlight one aspect of what I have been trying to do with Creating a Nation United, it was meant in an intentionally derogatory way and associated with not “having real beliefs… that require a moral or ethical stance”. I believe it is important to address this observation directly and set the record straight in case anyone else has felt this to be the case.

          For anyone who has taken the time to read through these conversations I have been having with individuals via Facebook for (almost) a full year, thank you. If you are unclear about my personal political opinions and background, I have outlined these at length and in detail on this website under “My Views”.

          In my opinion, it is the whole nature of “taking sides” that has created a seemingly irreconcilable schism between many different factions within our country. I see the whole two party political system as a warning against the danger of reactionary “side taking”; it seems that politicians, for a variety of complex and individualized reasons, focuses on taking the side of “their” political party versus doing what might be best for their constituents or for the country as a whole.

          After my experience attending the Women’s March on Washington, I began to question  what I might do, as an individual returning to a full time and a part time job, to begin approaching this problem of divisiveness in American politics. This was the first time in my personal political timeline that I realized I was physically, emotionally, and intellectually exhausted by the amount of hate and absence of compassion I had been harboring within my mind and body over the past two decades. I began the March with a whole variety of labels for individuals who I believed represented the “other side” of political thought; I ended the March with the understanding and belief that our ideologies do not necessarily need to divide us but rather can work toward creating a nation united through the acceptance and understanding that diversity of thought is one of the defining principles that allows America to be great.

          Accordingly, my way of engaging with these individuals, who represent a variety of political ideologies different from as well as similar to my own, is through informed research rather than attacking “their side” with “my side”. Simple observation has shown me that this reactionary emotional stance only leads to further entrenchment; we are simply animals with fight or flight mechanisms that kick in instinctively (without reason or thought) when we feel attacked.

          One of the most valuable lessons I have learned in suspending the firmly planted roots of my beliefs is that….I can be wrong. Like most people, I have often formed my opinions based on what I have “heard” rather than what I have researched; the former is everywhere and requires little energy whereas the latter can be sought out but requires active participation and time. Being “right” or “wrong” matters less when you are simply trying to understand or listen. Perhaps this is the “side” that I have taken in my approach; it is a side which seeks to understand rather than blame, to listen rather than accuse, and to admit fault and apologize when I am in the wrong.


One thought on “How to Take the “Side” of Compassion while Working against Divisiveness: Creating a Nation United

  1. Even holding a position of no-position is still a position. But that is hardly the problem as I see it. Rather, as you point out, it is the fixed and rigidly defended position which so easily dehumanizes and turns the “opposition” into the hated other. Coming from reactivity, fear and the deeply held belief in the rightness and completeness of one’s one narrative (can a narrative ever be so complete?) this inevitably leads to a closing down of conversational possibilities, deepening exploration and any possibility of the emergence of genuinely new and creative solutions. The emotional and physical wreckage that results is apparent everywhere we look. One would think that given it is thinking and its inherent flaws and limitations which creates these dead-ends, and that the continued perseverative use of this flawed tool to solve the problems it has created only seems to be making matters worse, both individually and collectively, that we might at least have a bit of caution and suspicion as to how trustworthy and reliable our established “positions” actually are. Our conditioned default of “I thought it, so it must be true, so I’ll just keep on thinking that,” seems not to be working out very well. (cf, David Bohm, “Thought as a System.” Thanks for continuing to explore all this!

    Like

Leave a comment