President Obama thanked Pope Francis for his role in bringing the US and Cuba together. He said his "moral example shows us the importance of pursuing the world as it should be, rather than simply settling for the world as it is."
A mark of moral leadership is holding up a vision and encouraging others to overcome their differences to embrace that vision. This kind of leadership is not content with analyzing problems but imagines solutions. It has the courage to take difficulties and turn them into assets. It moves beyond the accepted boundaries to engage the opposites and build unexpected alliances.
In all of our communities and countries there are challenges that seem insurmountable. And because we often lack the courage and imagination for radical action we settle for crisis management or remedial responses instead of addressing the roots of problems.
But if the Berlin Wall can fall and if South Africa can move from apartheid to democracy, then we should take courage that what once seemed impossible is not beyond our reach.
In the US we can finally commit to integrate our schools and create quality education for every child; we can reform the prison industrial complex that is devastating generations of men of color; we can pay a living wage and lift millions out poverty; we can achieve sensible gun laws and end the mindless slaughter in our schools and communities; we can live well and still conserve the environment.
.
These things are possible. But it will take the kind of moral example that Obama highlighted, not just by a pope or by politicians but by leaders at all levels – and that includes each one of us taking responsibility right where we are.
It will also take persistence. Social media has proved successful in sparking popular movements from Tahir Square to Occupy Wall Street, but it has not yet been able to sustain them. Change will take more than a click of a mouse or tap on an iPhone. We will need to find ways to use technology for genuinely honest dialogue, careful listening, coalition building and organizational training.
Vision, courage, imagination and persistence: these are essential qualities for leadership. What better way to celebrate this season of new life than by each of us making a choice to no longer accept the unacceptable. Let's pursue a vision of a world as it should be.
Monday, December 22, 2014
Monday, December 8, 2014
A moment of truth for conservatives
True conservatives should be at the forefront of demands for changes in law enforcement recruiting and training methods and in procedures by prosecutors in the wake of controversial police actions and decisions by grand juries.
Rand Paul is one of the few leading Republicans who are speaking out unequivocally against flagrant examples of abuse of government power. Instead, some Republicans have focused on condemning the violent protests or, as in the case of Matt Willis, the executive director of Missouri Republican Party, denouncing efforts to channel community anger into voter registration. This is short-sighted. Conservatives should use this moment to affirm their core belief in individual liberty and equal protection under the constitution.
I am reminded of an event at the National Press Club in 1996. Initiatives of Change/Hope in the Cities and several national other national organizations including the Faith & Politics Institute and Study Circles Resource Center (now Everyday Democracy) hosted a forum to encourage honest dialogue on race relations. Believing that all voices needed to be at the table, we assembled an unusual combination of national leaders from diverse political views to speak to the theme.
We took a calculated risk in inviting such polar opposites as Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Paul Weyrich, to take part in a panel discussion. No remarks had been vetted. As the founder of the Heritage Foundation, Free Congress Foundation and National Empowerment Television, Weyrich was known to provoke strong responses as one of the most influential figures in the conservative movement. As I describe in my book, Trustbuilding, when he rose to speak many in the audience held their breath.
Surprisingly, Weyrich began with a personal confession that for a long time he had simply ignored protest in the black community about prejudice and racism, particularly among police. “My attitude was, ‘Well, this is just a bunch of criminals probably trying to evade their just dues.’ I simply didn’t hear those cries. But I must tell you that one of the most profound events in my political life was the revelation of the comments made by the detective Mark Fuhrman during O. J. Simpson’s trial. I was astounded and outraged... And so I began to look more closely, and I’ve taken a particular interest in Philadelphia where certain bad white cops have targeted a lot of innocent black people to advance themselves by enhancing their record of arrest.”
As Weyrich continued, there was complete silence in the room. “I now find that in many cases these cries have a great basis of legitimacy, and they are cries that the conservative community….needs to take seriously… And because of our own view on the subject of government power, and the need to keep government in check, we conservatives should have a natural sympathy for these cries and be able to start a dialogue…My own experience is that once you begin a dialogue and you earn the trust of people… although you may come into the conversation on a very narrow basis, you will end up expanding that conversation and will continue, hopefully, to build trust on both sides.”
The national crisis of trust in our core institutions exposed in recent weeks is a moment of opportunity. Conservatives should call on their own best traditions to stand alongside those who are experiencing bias and sometimes brutality by the very people who should be protecting them. And they should press for reform of grand jury procedures that are unfairly weighted in favor of the police even in the case of apparently unjustified killing of unarmed people.
They could also support an increase in funding for community policing programs which has fallen significantly as the federal government focused more resources on fighting terrorism. From 2000 to 2007, the number of full-time community policing officers nationwide fell by more than half, to 47,000 from 103,000.
There are some positive models of police-community trustbuilding. As city manager of Cincinnati, Valerie Lemmie (who now serves on our Initiatives of Change board) was responsible for overseeing landmark agreements in 2002 with the Department of Justice and Community representatives regarding police-community relationships, and police policies, procedures and practices after the shooting of an unarmed 19-year-old black man by a white officer.
Such measures will not resolve the larger issues of poverty and segregation in our cities, but they will be an important first step.
Rand Paul is one of the few leading Republicans who are speaking out unequivocally against flagrant examples of abuse of government power. Instead, some Republicans have focused on condemning the violent protests or, as in the case of Matt Willis, the executive director of Missouri Republican Party, denouncing efforts to channel community anger into voter registration. This is short-sighted. Conservatives should use this moment to affirm their core belief in individual liberty and equal protection under the constitution.
I am reminded of an event at the National Press Club in 1996. Initiatives of Change/Hope in the Cities and several national other national organizations including the Faith & Politics Institute and Study Circles Resource Center (now Everyday Democracy) hosted a forum to encourage honest dialogue on race relations. Believing that all voices needed to be at the table, we assembled an unusual combination of national leaders from diverse political views to speak to the theme.
We took a calculated risk in inviting such polar opposites as Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Paul Weyrich, to take part in a panel discussion. No remarks had been vetted. As the founder of the Heritage Foundation, Free Congress Foundation and National Empowerment Television, Weyrich was known to provoke strong responses as one of the most influential figures in the conservative movement. As I describe in my book, Trustbuilding, when he rose to speak many in the audience held their breath.
Surprisingly, Weyrich began with a personal confession that for a long time he had simply ignored protest in the black community about prejudice and racism, particularly among police. “My attitude was, ‘Well, this is just a bunch of criminals probably trying to evade their just dues.’ I simply didn’t hear those cries. But I must tell you that one of the most profound events in my political life was the revelation of the comments made by the detective Mark Fuhrman during O. J. Simpson’s trial. I was astounded and outraged... And so I began to look more closely, and I’ve taken a particular interest in Philadelphia where certain bad white cops have targeted a lot of innocent black people to advance themselves by enhancing their record of arrest.”
As Weyrich continued, there was complete silence in the room. “I now find that in many cases these cries have a great basis of legitimacy, and they are cries that the conservative community….needs to take seriously… And because of our own view on the subject of government power, and the need to keep government in check, we conservatives should have a natural sympathy for these cries and be able to start a dialogue…My own experience is that once you begin a dialogue and you earn the trust of people… although you may come into the conversation on a very narrow basis, you will end up expanding that conversation and will continue, hopefully, to build trust on both sides.”
The national crisis of trust in our core institutions exposed in recent weeks is a moment of opportunity. Conservatives should call on their own best traditions to stand alongside those who are experiencing bias and sometimes brutality by the very people who should be protecting them. And they should press for reform of grand jury procedures that are unfairly weighted in favor of the police even in the case of apparently unjustified killing of unarmed people.
They could also support an increase in funding for community policing programs which has fallen significantly as the federal government focused more resources on fighting terrorism. From 2000 to 2007, the number of full-time community policing officers nationwide fell by more than half, to 47,000 from 103,000.
There are some positive models of police-community trustbuilding. As city manager of Cincinnati, Valerie Lemmie (who now serves on our Initiatives of Change board) was responsible for overseeing landmark agreements in 2002 with the Department of Justice and Community representatives regarding police-community relationships, and police policies, procedures and practices after the shooting of an unarmed 19-year-old black man by a white officer.
Such measures will not resolve the larger issues of poverty and segregation in our cities, but they will be an important first step.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Could Virginia help bridge the national divide?
In contact sports if you play scared you will get hurt. And in the mid-term elections the Democrats played scared.
Yes, Republicans worked shamelessly to suppress the vote in Texas, North Carolina and other states. Yes, the Koch brothers and others flooded key campaigns with money. And yes, some irresponsible voices played on fears of the electorate with wild statements conflating threats of Ebola, terrorists crossing the border and executive over-reach in Washington.
But the Democrats have only themselves to blame for an inept campaign that completely failed to build on a solid record of accomplishment. How could they do so badly despite a healthy growth rate, unemployment under six percent (although this figure masks a much grimmer reality), consumer confidence at a seven-year high and low inflation?
Their worst mistake was failing to champion the landmark reform that has delivered health care to 10 million people. They embarrassed themselves by disowning their leader. Instead of highlighting success they let themselves believe the Republican narrative – which was adopted by a typically lazy media – of a "deeply unpopular president." It did them no good. Most candidates in tough fights who distanced themselves from the president lost.
It was no surprise that the base did not turn out. Why would African Americans be energized when candidates held the first black president at arm’s length? Why would Latinos turn out for the Democrats when the Obama administration decided to delay executive action on immigration until after the election in the hopes of protecting vulnerable candidates? In Texas, Republican Greg Abbot garnered 45 percent of the Latino vote in his successful gubernatorial campaign.
Democrats relied too heavily on single issues such as women’s reproductive rights. By appealing only to minorities, single women and millennials they may be able to win the White House but not the House or Senate. Republicans were more disciplined than in previous elections and managed to keep the lunatic fringe in check. And there is serious thinking going on among some leading conservatives on reforming the tax code to make it friendlier to work and to families and to close loopholes; others are looking at criminal justice reform.
There is another factor that Democrats ignore at their peril. They must take seriously the need to reach white males, both middle class and blue collar workers, and address their anxieties.
Vast numbers are still suffering as a result of the Great Recession. Between 2007 and 2009 the net worth of an average family fell by $50,000. Many of those who experienced unemployment for the first time in their lives – often for months or even years – now find themselves working two or more jobs at far lower wages just to put food on the table. In his book Losing Our Way: an intimate portrait of a troubled America, Bob Herbert describes through numerous personal interviews a sense that the country is falling apart. Failing infrastructure and a fraying social contract cause many to look at the future with pessimism. By 2009-2010 the number of Americans committing suicide was approaching forty thousand annually, more than the number being killed in motor vehicle accidents. The suicide rate among men in their fifties increased nearly 50 percent from 2000 to 2102.
There is enormous anger at political elites – Democrats just as much as Republicans – who are completely entwined with megacorporate interests and Wall Street. A sense of insecurity and of unprecedented abandonment among millions of ordinary Americans allows vested interests to exploit racial, ethnic or class divisions and as well as historical resentments.
In a nation where political allegiance is increasingly defined by geography, Virginia stands as a key gateway state between North and South. This is important because our national political and cultural divide reflects in part the unhealed history of the Civil War and white Southerners reactions to President Johnson’s signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. To avoid ongoing gridlock we need some political leaders who can work intelligently to overcome mindsets stemming from historical resentment, condescension and acceptance of the usual stereotypes.
Although they are both Democrats, our Virginia senators, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine may be able to play a bridge-building role. Warner is respected for his business acumen and his bi-partisan approach to budget issues. Kaine takes his Catholic faith seriously and his father-in-law was a Republican governor who exemplified the best of the party’s tradition. Both are rooted in values important to a more conservative electorate. Could they help generate an honest dialogue and encourage the best contribution from their colleagues of both parties for the sake of the country?
Yes, Republicans worked shamelessly to suppress the vote in Texas, North Carolina and other states. Yes, the Koch brothers and others flooded key campaigns with money. And yes, some irresponsible voices played on fears of the electorate with wild statements conflating threats of Ebola, terrorists crossing the border and executive over-reach in Washington.
But the Democrats have only themselves to blame for an inept campaign that completely failed to build on a solid record of accomplishment. How could they do so badly despite a healthy growth rate, unemployment under six percent (although this figure masks a much grimmer reality), consumer confidence at a seven-year high and low inflation?
Their worst mistake was failing to champion the landmark reform that has delivered health care to 10 million people. They embarrassed themselves by disowning their leader. Instead of highlighting success they let themselves believe the Republican narrative – which was adopted by a typically lazy media – of a "deeply unpopular president." It did them no good. Most candidates in tough fights who distanced themselves from the president lost.
It was no surprise that the base did not turn out. Why would African Americans be energized when candidates held the first black president at arm’s length? Why would Latinos turn out for the Democrats when the Obama administration decided to delay executive action on immigration until after the election in the hopes of protecting vulnerable candidates? In Texas, Republican Greg Abbot garnered 45 percent of the Latino vote in his successful gubernatorial campaign.
Democrats relied too heavily on single issues such as women’s reproductive rights. By appealing only to minorities, single women and millennials they may be able to win the White House but not the House or Senate. Republicans were more disciplined than in previous elections and managed to keep the lunatic fringe in check. And there is serious thinking going on among some leading conservatives on reforming the tax code to make it friendlier to work and to families and to close loopholes; others are looking at criminal justice reform.
There is another factor that Democrats ignore at their peril. They must take seriously the need to reach white males, both middle class and blue collar workers, and address their anxieties.
Vast numbers are still suffering as a result of the Great Recession. Between 2007 and 2009 the net worth of an average family fell by $50,000. Many of those who experienced unemployment for the first time in their lives – often for months or even years – now find themselves working two or more jobs at far lower wages just to put food on the table. In his book Losing Our Way: an intimate portrait of a troubled America, Bob Herbert describes through numerous personal interviews a sense that the country is falling apart. Failing infrastructure and a fraying social contract cause many to look at the future with pessimism. By 2009-2010 the number of Americans committing suicide was approaching forty thousand annually, more than the number being killed in motor vehicle accidents. The suicide rate among men in their fifties increased nearly 50 percent from 2000 to 2102.
There is enormous anger at political elites – Democrats just as much as Republicans – who are completely entwined with megacorporate interests and Wall Street. A sense of insecurity and of unprecedented abandonment among millions of ordinary Americans allows vested interests to exploit racial, ethnic or class divisions and as well as historical resentments.
In a nation where political allegiance is increasingly defined by geography, Virginia stands as a key gateway state between North and South. This is important because our national political and cultural divide reflects in part the unhealed history of the Civil War and white Southerners reactions to President Johnson’s signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. To avoid ongoing gridlock we need some political leaders who can work intelligently to overcome mindsets stemming from historical resentment, condescension and acceptance of the usual stereotypes.
Although they are both Democrats, our Virginia senators, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine may be able to play a bridge-building role. Warner is respected for his business acumen and his bi-partisan approach to budget issues. Kaine takes his Catholic faith seriously and his father-in-law was a Republican governor who exemplified the best of the party’s tradition. Both are rooted in values important to a more conservative electorate. Could they help generate an honest dialogue and encourage the best contribution from their colleagues of both parties for the sake of the country?
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Lessons from long distance runners
John was born in New York and grew up in privileged circumstances in Boston and San Francisco. According to his obituary: “He attended white-tie dances at FDR's White House, meeting the President and dancing with Eleanor Roosevelt and then listening to Gershwin himself play Rhapsody in Blue. Yet he was never a snob. At age 18, John met Dr. Frank Buchman, founder of Moral Re-Armament [now Initiatives of Change], a network of people of many nationalities and backgrounds, committed to building trust and constructive relationships within and between nations. From Buchman, John learned, ‘If I listened to God, He would tell me what to do.’ Listening became the cornerstone of his life, enabling him to forge deep friendships with people, who were sometimes enemies, as he sought to help them overcome personal pain and prejudices sufficiently to unite to solve problems in their communities.”
Among his lifelong friends was my dad, a former shipyard worker from Scotland, who spent many years in the US in efforts to overcome industrial conflict in the nation’s steelworks, automobile and aircraft factories and coal mines. He and John – both in their twenties – would travel the country together, meeting labor leaders and employers in work that was seen as vital to the war effort. They both served in the US Army.
In the post-war years, John’s future wife, Denise, whose mother was French, was a trusted colleague of Irène Laure, a key figure in Franco-German reconciliation, and interpreted for her on her international travels.
After an active life working on several continents, the Woods settled in Pasadena, California. John became the director of development for the Braille Institute in Los Angeles and Denise served as dean of students at a private girls' school. As they approached retirement years they could have settled for a well-deserved quiet and comfortable life. Instead they launched into a whole new adventure by addressing the needs of Pasadena as an increasing number of immigrants made the city their home.
As senior warden of All Saints Episcopal Church, John volunteered to explore the possibilities of creating a regional skills training center. This required building a partnership between city government, the school system and a community college – all of which guarded their territory jealously. At first John was hesitant. “I’d only been to Harvard, which doesn’t prepare you for real life all that well.” But his open, persistent approach and ability to build trust paid off. More than 4,000 trainees, many of them immigrants, now attend the center each year.
John was a gentle, gracious man. His most important asset was his love of people and an ability to listen and respond without judgement. The head of the community college noted his leadership qualities, his “low-key personality, not excitable and able to meld the various groups together and come up with something that would be workable. It was essential that all three parties felt they had done something constructive.”
In 1983, All Saints Church commissioned Denise to conduct a survey of the quality of life in Pasadena. In the course of seven months she conducted over 100 personal interviews with community leaders. She said, “I went to these interviews with no hidden agenda of my own; I went to be taught.” The result was a report, Experiencing Pasadena: The Needs, Promises and Tasks of an American City. It depicted a city that was rapidly becoming two cities: a rich city and a poor city. As a result of Denise’s report, All Saints founded the Office of Creative Connections to identify urban needs and resources. Now in its fourth decade of operation, the center has incubated several major projects, including "Young and Healthy," which provides health care to uninsured children and "Day One," a city-wide effort to combat alcohol and drug addiction.John and Denise’s style of teambuilding in the community was distinctive. They called it “caring for the care-givers.” They would invite individuals who were knowledgeable or affected by a community issue to come to their home for informal conversations over coffee or a simple lunch. They discovered that many of those working in the city’s 192 social service agencies did not know each other. Often people were meeting for the first time or at least for the first time over a meal.
It was during this time that the Woods built a friendship with John Perkins, an African American pastor, civil rights activist, author and community developer from Mississippi who founded the Christian Community Development Association, which is now active in neighborhoods across America.
Even after their final move to a retirement community at Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, this remarkable pair continued their outreach by creating an after-school program, "After-the-Bell," for local middle school students, resulting in a feature in Time magazine.
Richmond owes much to John and Denise. They visited several times in the late 1980s and shared their experiences with leaders of this community. Their encouragement and wisdom gave impetus to the emerging network of honest dialogue and inclusive partnerships. The methodology employed in Pasadena provided a foundation for what is now known as Hope in the Cities. Key lessons include:
- Listen to the people of the community one by one and to its public bodies to gain a living picture of its needs, its strengths, and its possibilities.
- Discern the meaning of what has been heard and the imperatives of what must be addressed.
- Report to the community – not blaming or name calling, but not watering down the truth – and speak with a moral voice to the whole community.
- Connect citizens around common concerns and create coalitions and structures to carry out what needs to be done.
A senior Pasadena attorney said of the Woods’ contribution: “Nothing gets done until you have people like John and Denise whose motivation...has been truly directed to transcendent values of the community, even at the expense of their own personal economic benefit.”
Thank you, John and Denise, for all that you taught us. You have made a difference.
To read more about John and Denise Wood see Basil Entwistle, Making Cities Work (Hope Publishing House 1992), and Corcoran Trustbuilding, an Honest Conversation on Race, Reconciliation, and Responsibility (University of Virginia Press 2010).
Monday, September 15, 2014
Why story matters
This week Scotland will vote on independence. Whatever the outcome, the campaign is a reminder that identity, culture and the power of story can trump rational argument and economic self-interest.
Story matters. For centuries Scots have told a story of the English as dominating neighbors and oppressors who have looked on Scots as inferior. There is truth in this. But this version of history persists despite Scots’ prominent role in every aspect of British life including in its rise as an industrial power and its imperial ventures around the globe. Indeed there can be few cases where a minority has exerted such a deep influence on a majority population.
According to Margaret Smith, in Reckoning with the Past, history and memory “provide material for group myths that are the source of social cohesion because they supply operational codes and a system of ethics…. History becomes narrative when it turns into a frame of reference for individuals and groups in their daily lives.” The group “story” provides psychological security. “Regardless of the material benefits a person derives from group membership, the person will have a strong psychological proclivity to support certain narratives that keep her own psyche intact.”
The power of historical narrative is seen clearly in Northern Ireland which was the subject of Smith’s research. Even after the 1998 Good Friday Agreement which ended decades of violent conflict, provocative sectarian marches continue to keep alive partisan historical narratives that have been handed down from generation to generation.
In Russia, President Putin builds popular domestic support for his policies in Ukraine, despite US and EU sanctions, by playing on his compatriots’ resentment at loss of prestige since the disintegration of the Soviet Union and an emotional desire to relive the glory days of Catherine the Great. The memory of China’s thousand-year history as the world’s wealthiest nation and its humiliation by colonial powers is a motivating force for its leaders and for its people who demand respect in the world. Every Iranian knows that the US participated in the overthrow of a democratically elected government in order to preserve its oil interests. And anyone who has visited the ruins of Persepolis, founded in the 6th century BC by Darius the Great at the height of the Persian empire, will understand better the immense pride of Iranians and their insistence on a right to nuclear power.
Steven Ward, who teaches government at Cornell University, wrote in the Washington Post earlier this year about Russia’s escalation of the crisis in Ukraine: “Defending honor, responding to insults, avoiding humiliation and building prestige are intangible values that are difficult to incorporate in a cost-benefit analysis. And history (and recent scholarship) shows that states have sometimes pursued these values at the expense of economic and security interests.”
The same dynamics can be seen at work in social and political debates in the US where rational argument does not always prevail. For instance, in a recent Pew poll, 46 percent of Republicans said there is not solid evidence of global warming, compared with 11 percent of Democrats. Since the 46 percent includes a large number of highly educated individuals who are aware of the overwhelming scientific evidence, other factors must be influencing the survey.
A column in the New York Times by Brendan Nyhan entitled “When beliefs and facts collide,” offers important insights on the question of cognitive dissonance. He highlights surprising findings by Yale Law School professor Dan Kahan:
In Richmond, Virginia, my Hope in the Cities colleagues and partners ran a regional project on race, class and political jurisdiction using census data to illustrate how poverty is entrenched in certain inner city areas and how it is rapidly increasing in the surrounding suburbs. The three-part presentation included a segment showing the historical events that had led to the current reality. Some groups were exposed to both the data and the history. Other groups saw only the data. While both groups reported increased understanding, the group that was exposed to the history saw a far greater impact.
Our report stated: While attendees began with similar perspectives and backgrounds in working to address poverty in the community, those attending the sessions in which local history and current systemic challenges were discussed were more strongly impacted. Results suggest that the information and facilitated discussions challenged assumptions about the root causes of poverty, including that the cause is primarily situated in individuals and current barriers. These discussions also provided a new perspective on actions needed to produce community change. While data about current trends is important and needed, understanding how we got where we are today gives that data meaning that impacts understanding and motivation to act.
On national issues that are polarized by race, politics and culture we would do well to note Brendan Nyhan’s advice: “We need to try to break the association between identity and factual beliefs on high-profile issues – for instance, by making clear that you can believe in human-induced climate change and still be a conservative Republican.”
As people connect with each other’s individual and community stories and are able to have open and respectful conversation about their sense of identity, their values and their beliefs, they may be better able to deal with facts.
Story matters. For centuries Scots have told a story of the English as dominating neighbors and oppressors who have looked on Scots as inferior. There is truth in this. But this version of history persists despite Scots’ prominent role in every aspect of British life including in its rise as an industrial power and its imperial ventures around the globe. Indeed there can be few cases where a minority has exerted such a deep influence on a majority population.
According to Margaret Smith, in Reckoning with the Past, history and memory “provide material for group myths that are the source of social cohesion because they supply operational codes and a system of ethics…. History becomes narrative when it turns into a frame of reference for individuals and groups in their daily lives.” The group “story” provides psychological security. “Regardless of the material benefits a person derives from group membership, the person will have a strong psychological proclivity to support certain narratives that keep her own psyche intact.”
The power of historical narrative is seen clearly in Northern Ireland which was the subject of Smith’s research. Even after the 1998 Good Friday Agreement which ended decades of violent conflict, provocative sectarian marches continue to keep alive partisan historical narratives that have been handed down from generation to generation.
In Russia, President Putin builds popular domestic support for his policies in Ukraine, despite US and EU sanctions, by playing on his compatriots’ resentment at loss of prestige since the disintegration of the Soviet Union and an emotional desire to relive the glory days of Catherine the Great. The memory of China’s thousand-year history as the world’s wealthiest nation and its humiliation by colonial powers is a motivating force for its leaders and for its people who demand respect in the world. Every Iranian knows that the US participated in the overthrow of a democratically elected government in order to preserve its oil interests. And anyone who has visited the ruins of Persepolis, founded in the 6th century BC by Darius the Great at the height of the Persian empire, will understand better the immense pride of Iranians and their insistence on a right to nuclear power.
Steven Ward, who teaches government at Cornell University, wrote in the Washington Post earlier this year about Russia’s escalation of the crisis in Ukraine: “Defending honor, responding to insults, avoiding humiliation and building prestige are intangible values that are difficult to incorporate in a cost-benefit analysis. And history (and recent scholarship) shows that states have sometimes pursued these values at the expense of economic and security interests.”
The same dynamics can be seen at work in social and political debates in the US where rational argument does not always prevail. For instance, in a recent Pew poll, 46 percent of Republicans said there is not solid evidence of global warming, compared with 11 percent of Democrats. Since the 46 percent includes a large number of highly educated individuals who are aware of the overwhelming scientific evidence, other factors must be influencing the survey.
A column in the New York Times by Brendan Nyhan entitled “When beliefs and facts collide,” offers important insights on the question of cognitive dissonance. He highlights surprising findings by Yale Law School professor Dan Kahan:
The divide over belief in evolution between more and less religious people is wider among people who otherwise show familiarity with math and science, which suggests that the problem isn’t a lack of information. When he instead tested whether respondents knew the theory of evolution, omitting mention of belief, there was virtually no difference between more and less religious people with high scientific familiarity. In other words, religious people knew the science; they just weren’t willing to say that they believed in it.This finding supports what those of us who conduct community dialogues have often found to be true. Facts are vital but constructive dialogue is more likely if they are presented in ways that do not involve the humiliation, or threaten the security and deeply held values, of key stakeholders. Facts may be received better and understood if they connect with the belief systems and values of all participants. And if individuals and groups feel their stories are being heard and respected, they are much more likely to be open to accepting challenging facts.
In Richmond, Virginia, my Hope in the Cities colleagues and partners ran a regional project on race, class and political jurisdiction using census data to illustrate how poverty is entrenched in certain inner city areas and how it is rapidly increasing in the surrounding suburbs. The three-part presentation included a segment showing the historical events that had led to the current reality. Some groups were exposed to both the data and the history. Other groups saw only the data. While both groups reported increased understanding, the group that was exposed to the history saw a far greater impact.
Our report stated: While attendees began with similar perspectives and backgrounds in working to address poverty in the community, those attending the sessions in which local history and current systemic challenges were discussed were more strongly impacted. Results suggest that the information and facilitated discussions challenged assumptions about the root causes of poverty, including that the cause is primarily situated in individuals and current barriers. These discussions also provided a new perspective on actions needed to produce community change. While data about current trends is important and needed, understanding how we got where we are today gives that data meaning that impacts understanding and motivation to act.
On national issues that are polarized by race, politics and culture we would do well to note Brendan Nyhan’s advice: “We need to try to break the association between identity and factual beliefs on high-profile issues – for instance, by making clear that you can believe in human-induced climate change and still be a conservative Republican.”
As people connect with each other’s individual and community stories and are able to have open and respectful conversation about their sense of identity, their values and their beliefs, they may be better able to deal with facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)