Concerns and Tactics

[Esther .]

In a message dated 23/12/2001 13:39:35 Eastern Standard Time,
peggy at opencirclecompany.com writes:


> I believe the great creator of real, deep, lasting solidarity comes EXACTLY
> from expressing viewpoints that disagree.  If you and others, with
> different
> points of view weren't part of this mix, the sort of solidarity that comes
> from doing things differently will be impossible to achieve.  Indeed, I'd
> love to hear viewpoints even more different than anything expressed to date
> on this list.  So how do we do that and avoid polarization?  I believe that
> answer is where hope rests.  And the good news is I think we know a great
> deal about this.  What can make it different is the assumptions that unlie
> how we interact.  The unspoken purpose in the vast majority of "normal"
> communication is is to reach an answer, a single answer.  This leads to
> advocating positions in the need to get to ONE answer.  This fight to be
> right, to win the argument is what creates polarization; NOT that we see
> things differently.  The power of dialogue is that it isn't driving to find
> an answer; it's purpose is to understand.  This leads to an emphasis on
> listening to each other.  And what seems to happen is the most amazing
> thing.  We may never agree on the vast majority of things but we will come
> to respect each other as human beings and quite likely discover some things
> that we mutually care about.  And that leads to building the sort of
> solidarity that does lead to answers and collective action.

I agree with you, Peggy. Indeed, in the conflict resolution process that I
facilitate, there is a wisdom in the 'different' point of view and we learn
to draw out and highlight the differences to learn more from each other. We
also understand that someone who seems 'difficult' is carrying a role for the
group. On behalf of the group, even. And when that person gets scapegoated,
it is often because the group is unwilling to recognize within itself and
individually within each of the other members, that which they are most
uncomfortable within themselves.

One of the things we do is to draw out the difference and then ask the
members of the group to each say which part of what the different point of
view is that they can relate to in some way.

So, for example, Bin Laden seems to be carrying the role of religion taken to
extreme hatred. What part of his role are we most uncomfortable in ourselves?
He has taken the role of hurting people who do not share his faith, or even
his version of his faith. I ask the question, is there a part of our own
religion (whichever that is) that has taught us to hate and to exclude?  Bin
Laden has embraced a role of violence. The world has embraced violence in
return in sending troops and bombs to Afganistan. Without debating the right
or wrong of that, what part of our willingness to engage in violence do we
most hate in Bin Laden?

Tough questions for which I have few answers. But as Rainer Maria Rilke said:

"[Have] patience with everything unresolved in your heart and... try to love
the questions themselves... Don't search for the answers, which could not be
given to you now, because you would not be able to live them. And the point
is, to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps... you will
gradually, without even noticing it, live your way into the answers."

Regards
Esther

Esther Ewing
Authorized Distributor, Panoramic Feedback
www.panoramicfeedback.com
The Change Alliance
New York Line: 212-661-6024
330 East 38th St. Apt. 53K
New York, New York, 10016
Toronto Line: 416-209-0481

Assisting Individuals and Organizations to Build Capability
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20011223/60f0b636/attachment-0017.htm>