Session Fourteen

Coming Out of Corners

Objective:
Unlearn polarized indoctrination that breeds discord.

Pivot toward common ground thinking.

Cooperation will become the marching orders of the
human species or we’re not going to make it.

—Tom Shadyac

I
t’s summer 2016 in Washington, DC. When Arizona congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema takes the stage at the National Association for Social Workers Biennial Conference, the whole room is rocking.

She’s like a celebrity to us—not because of her signature swag (although she has been voted best-dressed politician four years straight). Her chic glasses and shoes aren’t what’s bringing us to our feet. There’s so much more.

I’m there with my friend Kathy, going ballistic along with the rest of the audience. We all work on the front lines of social change and services, and we need something to celebrate. Every day, the air we breathe is heavy. We come face-to-face with people who suffer the devastating consequences of our broken sociopolitical system: hunger, homelessness, poverty, abuse, addiction, incarceration, depression, anxiety, and despair. We work in every kind of setting imaginable—from schools to hospitals to clinics and beyond. Whether serving veterans, elders, children, or families, we’re deeply committed to reaching and serving vulnerable populations.

When forty-year-old Sinema arrives on the scene, the air turns light and celebratory. She seems as energetic as she was at twenty-eight, when she became Arizona’s youngest lawmaker. Everyone is buzzing about her boundless drive and stellar leadership. We hoot and holler in tandem when we learn that Sinema had just been named among the top three most bipartisan congressional leaders.

Sinema spoke about how being a social worker has shaped her path.1 Our heads are all nodding in sync. She has taken our professional code of ethics to Capitol Hill, and we are elated. The code embodies core values of service, social justice, human dignity and worth, importance of human relationships, integrity, and competence. It’s one we’d love to see become maxim everywhere.

It’s not only Sinema’s noble feats on Capitol Hill that enthrall us. It’s her riveting story that explains why she walks her talk so wholeheartedly. At eight, her parents divorced and her father lost his job; she and her siblings became homeless. They took up residence in an abandoned gas station, using a chalkboard as a makeshift wall. There was no running water. No electricity. They wore hand-me-downs and ate powdered eggs. Times were tough.

She worked hard and earned a full scholarship to college, graduating early with honors. Sinema then went on to earn her master’s in social work, a law degree, and a PhD. Her own hardships, education, and work within low-income schools drove her to the political arena to bring about sorely needed change.

Congresswoman Sinema knows there’s no time for wrangling when people’s lives are on the line. When we stay in our corners, nothing gets done. She tells us her quest is to always look for shared values that lead to shared solutions. Even at a time of great divide, where hyperpartisanship rules, she’s been able to get things done by reaching across the aisle. In her book Unite and Conquer: How to Build Coalitions That Win and Last, she says that “unity, alignment, and partnership” are the pathways to bring about needed change.

Sinema says it’s vital that we step outside of our comfort zones and extend friendships with those different from us. She worries that the legendary story of Hubert Humphrey and Barry Goldwater, who were said to have been duking it out on the Senate floor by day then leaving to have a drink together at night, have become unlikely occurrences in the face of gridlock and contentious party lines.

She’s even leading up a new kind of spin zone for politicians—one that is truly healthy. An avid runner and cyclist, she jumped on the invite to teach a spin class at the Members’ gym, spurring on fellow colleagues in Congress to have some fun and start their long days right. The only debate is over song choices; she’s been known to jostle Paul Ryan about his musical taste. Besides the bipartisan spin class, she and her colleagues have an entire working group devoted to finding common ground.

Sinema refused to allow the polarization of the DC political swamp to consume her. Instead, she prioritizes the greater good. She’s made empathy and finding solutions her signature brand. And if she can do it on Capitol Hill, we can find similar opportunities in our boardrooms, classrooms, living rooms, and communities. Once we see what’s possible on our own territory, we realize the chance to bring our positivity and productivity even further. We can become global twenty-first-century citizens, those who can adapt and demonstrate flexibility, empathy, curiosity, and the ability to work across cultures, party lines, professional domains, and other affiliations to bring positive impacts and better outcomes.

Global Twenty-First-Century Citizen

Academic Definition

A person who is committed to adopting a global mind-set, going beyond traditional boundaries and seeing the interconnectedness of human beings and phenomena.

Street Definition

You play well with everyone, unafraid to visit different sandboxes and try new ways of doing things. You’d rather experience life without dirt in your eye from all the mud-slinging that happens. #gobig #don’tstayhometho

Find Common Ground and Form Brigades

In 2005, Bono pulled on his signature rocker jeans and sunglasses. He was headed to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to meet with the forty-third president of the United States, the one he’d been bashing publicly during his concerts. When George W. Bush got wind of it, he invited Bono to the Oval Office. Bush said he wanted to find out what was behind the accusations, and to see if they could find common ground.

It was an unlikely scene but evolved into a friendship that transcended Bush’s and Bono’s personal and political differences. They formed an alliance that went on to help millions of people affected by the AIDS crisis in Africa. These are the types of hard-to-imagine collaborations that should be making headlines every day. Instead, we think every inch of the ground is ablaze, with no space to stop and listen to anyone planted in different ideological, geographic, or other social identity spaces than us.

The raging wildfire keeps us running scared. We think there are no safe patches of ground. Instead of using our energy to join forces and form brigades, so that we can put this fire out together, we fight over who’s to blame. Our only way to go beyond is to hunt for places that offer respite from the fire, where we can restrategize. It’s our only chance for survival. Like any dangerous fire, it requires the best of our resources to help us rethink Smoky the Bear’s “Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires,” and move to an “Only We” way of operating.

Polarization isn’t working for any of us, but it’s hard to escape with extremes between two-party political systems, rich and poor, young and old, and nations across the world. We are embroiled in inherited battles that encourage us to fight. Everyone is trained to believe that the other side is totally opposite, that there’s no common ground to be found. The flames keep getting fanned, instead of finding ways to go beyond.

Our quest to form brigades is disrupted by gasoline dousers,2 the inflamators out there who love to add fuel to the fire. No matter what side of the spectrum you are on, when you see people on your side doing this, beware. Along the trails, the dousers scream and hold up their “Only Me” signs. There’s passion behind the screaming, but the fumes are so toxic that no one can safely get close enough to solve anything. Gasoline dousing is the opposite of conscious global citizenry; with no desire to connect and contribute something, there’s no hope that positive and productive change can occur. There’s no awareness that going beyond traditional boundaries to see difference and diversity as an asset rather than a deficit could get us to a better place. All inflamators do is get everyone to stay riled up in their corners, thinking caps put away.

Know the Difference Between
Advocacy and Antagonism

Advocacy is the act of championing people’s rights and well-being. It involves standing up for a social cause, particularly when it affects those who are underserved or marginalized. Advocates seek to raise consciousness on issues, working to mobilize resources for the greater good.

Antagonism is when you treat ideological differences as sport. They see those they disagree with as opponents, and use every trick in the polarized playbook against them. Antagonists’ attacks are personal, not policy-directed. They refuse to listen or allow a different side to show up without needling, poking, and ripping it apart. They build walls instead of bridges.

We can’t keep getting triggered and miss the chance to see that:

The natural reaction to inflamators is to explode—but we need to resist this reaction at all costs. The people who act and think this way need help. We cannot let them speak for the rest of us. They are adored by the media—their provocations sell. They’re used to create the illusion of a bigger drama and divide among us. If we really think that people who look, live, love, worship, and engage in life differently than us are the extremes of their group’s cast stereotype, we’ve become blinded by the smokescreens that inflamators conjure up.3 All we can see are our principles that have been drilled into us as “the way,” while missing the chance to accomplish better outcomes.

Don’t Let Principles Stand in the Way of Outcomes

Hoards of people hold up their signs: “It’s a Child, Not a Choice,” “We Vote Pro-Life,” and “Overturn Roe v. Wade.” They hold crosses, each other’s hands, and pictures of bloodied fetuses. On the other side of the street, people hold “My Body, My Decision,” “Let Women Decide,” and “Never Again” signs with coat hangers in tow. This is the scene of one of the most divisive political arguments of our day. The flames burn high on both sides of the street.

Abortion gets people seeing red, and gets them to the voting booths. For pro-life voters, principles don’t lead to better outcomes. There is an ironic contradiction at hand for those who think their pro-life stance leads to less abortions. In fact, the abortion rate drops significantly on the watch of pro-choice leaders. During the past three decades, abortion rates have remained static or decreased slightly under Republican administrations, versus their counterparts who’ve seen sharper declines. For example, under President Barack Obama, rates fell from 16 for every 1,000 women (ages 15–44) to 12.5 in 2013. This is the lowest on record since 1971, and half the rate in 1980. For George H. W. Bush, rates remained at 16 between 2001–2008. Similarly, under Bill Clinton’s administration, abortion rates fell from 23 to 16.2, while under George W. Bush abortion rates stayed at 16 until the end of this tenure, when it dropped to 15 in 2009.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report cites increased access to health care, birth control, and other health and social services as far more effective means of reducing abortion than restricting access to it.

This is one of many examples as to why it’s necessary to stop, rewind, and look for root issues. Abortion is a loaded debate, packed with moral contingencies galore for each side. But despite venomous disagreement, most would agree that preventing unplanned pregnancies is optimal. Most ideological disagreements keep us tangled over problems without addressing root causes. We’re so busy seeing red, we can’t see the greenspaces available to gather and collaborate. This division breeds the type of condition where we become more likely to watch everything go down in flames, rather than form needed brigades to make for a better world.

The “Speak English” debate in schools is another hot-button issue in the United States that leads to poor outcomes and missed opportunities. It’s also situated within a larger contentious fight over immigrant access and rights. The mind-set is based on fears that immigrants take something away from America rather than bring gifts to share. In schools, ELL (English Language Learner) students are often seen as draining resources, overlooked for the cultural and linguistic assets they bring to the classroom that help native-born students increase their global capacities.

A 2017 conducted by Maria Arrendono and colleagues actually found that kindergarteners in bilingual classrooms improved significantly on intelligence and attentional control. For those with Speak English bumper stickers affixed on their cars, principles are getting in the way of a better classroom environment for everyone.

Our whole life, we are taught to stick to our principles at all costs. But when principles come at the expense of desired outcomes, we have to think differently. Agility doesn’t mean abandoning principles, but it does require us to recognize that what we’re fighting for can lead to unintended results. It’s all tricky within a world where polarized indoctrination makes us think we have to pick sides and fight aggressively to defend territory. This approach prevents us from finding the common ground that can make us all stand stronger. Society, relationships—
anything—will never be perfect, but focusing on desired outcomes is an important start. We don’t want to find ourselves in a position when rigid principles cause outcomes that are the opposite of what we were striving for in the first place.

Look for Connections

Another contentious debate around the world relates to how to achieve a more perfect society. Everyone has a different take, and many of our nationalistic beliefs are held accordingly. Like John Lennon, most of us have imagined what society could be like without any war, crime, and inequality. We’d love a land where we didn’t need locks or guns. Where trespassing signs are MIA. No killing. No Jerry Springer. No road rage. Where kids aren’t left behind. Where black lives matter. No McDonald’s for most and Ruth’s Chris Steakhouses for a few. Where everyone’s needs are met, and there’s even time to celebrate our differences. Imagine that.

Most of us wouldn’t fight about that kind of vision but would disagree on how to get there. It’s the classic battle between individualism and collectivism. In one corner, individualism fights for the needs of the individual. In the other, collectivism fights for the greater good. It’s an unnatural separation when we look a little closer—but is seen by many as representing polar opposites. We’re taught to think rigidly, in either/or terms instead of both/and. We duke it out in vain—without realizing what we could learn from one other if we stepped out of our staunch ideological corners and started connecting. Neither side is perfect, but we can learn from each other’s successes and struggles.

In China, people take care of their elders instead of dumping them in smelly nursing homes the minute they can’t remember where they put their reading glasses. There’s no Nineteen and Counting. Unemployment rates are low. But there’s still crime, low fertility, aging population concerns, ethnic tensions, water shortages, and corruption. Many poke holes at democracy, saying that it only gives an illusion of freedom, that we have far less control and freedom than we think.

Both systems have pluses and minuses. You’d think this would make us eager to talk to each other to find out what’s working well and what’s not. When we travel across borders, we learn valuable information that helps us all get to a better place. For some of us, there may be times when the global terrain can feel like the Wild West—and we revert to thinking we’ve got to stay in our own spaces. But the opportunity to think globally—in ways that help us form intercultural, interfaith, and interdisciplinary brigades—is one that cannot be underestimated. Our strength is in our shared wisdom and common ground.

It’s hard when ideology clamps its teeth down on all of us from an early age. Connection is the only way through. It’s where we find our touchpoints for shared interests. If we isolate on polar extremes, we won’t be able to work on something positive and productive. Connection doesn’t mean that we have to merge our ideas or give up our individual convictions. It does mean taking time to listen to one another across borders, generations, political views, religion affiliations, race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and other affiliations. When we stay stuck in corners trying to prove our points, we give up our ability to be global citizens—those who commit to making life better for everyone, regardless of which team(s) they call their own.

Despite the polarization that permeates our world, every citizen around the globe wants to flourish. No one wants to be controlled by governing systems or other systems that damage our capacity to connect and progress. To varying extents, we are all subject to forms of control, which becomes the birthplace of fear as well as polarized thinking and behavior. This is why we desperately need to work together to forge common bonds so that our ability to set the world on fire in positive ways isn’t sabotaged by inflamators.

Widen Your Sandbox

To overcome polarized indoctrination and the resulting disconnection, we need to look for common ground wherever we go. Beyond political terrain, we face polarized thinking that keeps us in silos instead of being able to forge dynamic collaborations. We need a wide sandbox where we can expand and play well together.

Going beyond toward a global citizen identity isn’t just about personal affiliations. Even at work, we are not immune to polarization. It might not be as touchy as hot-button political issues but can silo us nonetheless. Every career has its own form of training in which we are indoctrinated into thinking and doing things certain ways. Instead of combining knowledge and transferring information across disciplines, we often stay insular and cornered off from perspectives that could be very useful.

There’s endless learning and unlearning we can accomplish together. Fortunately, there’s more attention being given to the critical nature of interdisciplinary bonds that help us make integrated, universal connections.

One way to begin is to take on a What-can-I-learn-from-you? mind-set. This is something schools are doing—adopting the medical rounds model to provide hands-on support for teachers right within the classroom, similar to teaching methods in hospitals when doctors in training watch senior doctors to learn the ropes.

Unlearning polarized indoctrination reaps big benefits. We can enter into meaningful exchanges that enhance our lives personally and professionally. We can discover creative solutions that we wouldn’t have considered within the confines of our corners. Branching out to find common ground and new spaces for collaboration can help us stay clear of disconnection that stunts growth and progress. The less divided we are, the more we can harness our collective knowledge and passion to find better outcomes. We can widen our sandbox, allowing room for creative solutions toward common ground.

Interdisciplinary

Academic Definition

Combining two or more academic, scientific, and artistic branches of knowledge. It involves crossing traditional boundaries between schools of thought to respond to new needs within our twenty-
first-century global context.

Street Definition

Getting out of your school and work corners to combine knowledge and go beyond unneeded boundaries. Teachers can learn from doctors, scientists from artists. #connectthedots