Political conflict has felt front and centre over the last few weeks. Events in Israel and Gaza have taken a devastating and catastrophic turn. Meanwhile, closer to home, we’ve had a big election and swing in power here in New Zealand, and a similar process around indigenous rights in our neighbouring nation, Australia. The world feels fractured, divided, turbulent. It has me thinking about how we handle conflict in our lives on the micro and macro level.
The election results did not go the way I would have liked. There’s disappointment and frustration in this, but also a sense of inevitability. The political pendulum swings ever left and right, like a metronome. Every few terms it will change. The people get fed up with aspects of their lives, seek someone to blame, and take a swing at whoever is in power.
I suspect this swing may be happening the world over at present. As war rages and the planet spins towards climate catastrophe, as fuel prices rise and the cost of living soars, as house prices become ever more out of reach to the average earner, we look for who to blame and express our frustration with our vote.
As the pendulum swings from left to right here in New Zealand, I see the reverse swing happening in my country of origin, the UK. And some years from now this will reverse again.
The most sensible and memorable words I have heard on the subject of politics, came from Democrat-supporting political commentator, Van Jones, who worked on Whitehouse projects under both the Obama and Trump administrations. In a conversation with Buddhist Psychologist, Tara Brach, he was asked how he had navigated working with the right-wing Trump administration whilst holding staunch left-wing views. His response was this:
I have yet to meet a bird that can fly with only a left wing
I’ll admit, these words stopped me in my tracks.
Nowhere more than in politics do we hold the conviction of our own rightness and others’ wrongness so strongly. I am as guilty of this polarisation as the next person, but it goes against my beliefs and my learning as a psychologist.
What if we need both sides of the spectrum? What if no one point of view is ever complete?
There’s a concept in psychology called Dialectical Thinking. A Google search tells me this is originally attributed to 19th century German philosopher, Hegel, but more recently has become a central teaching in therapy schools such as DBT (Dialectical Behaviour Therapy). It suggests that in two apparently contradictory or opposing positions, there is a kernel of truth in both.
It’s a radical way to approach conflict and difference.
Instead of arguing our point with increasing conviction and becoming ever more polarised in our position. Instead of perpetuating a cycle where no one side is even listening to the other, let alone allowing the opposing point of view to influence their own thinking. Instead of shutting down and labelling the other as ‘bad’ or ‘wrong’, Dialectical Thinking proposes we open up to hearing the other point of view, without giving up our own. We become willing to hold both. We drop the sense of threat and allow for a sense of possibility. What if the other side might hold a piece of the puzzle that your own blinkered world-view has neglected to consider? What if both could be valid? Both could be true? Both could be part of a bigger picture? What if we need both?
What if the bird needs a right wing and a left wing to steer a balanced course?
Isn’t this the very basis of democracy?
It's easier said than done in practice, but this approach is an effective way of navigating conflict and is often used in couples therapy and other relational situations. It diffuses tension, allows stressed-out nervous systems to unwind, and creates space for common ground and for third possibilities to emerge. It offers a pathway for individuals and communities to move out of stuck binary arguments and impasses, into more creative solutions.
It calls to mind the work that led to the Good Friday Agreement between the UK and Ireland in 1998, that ended decades of violence and terror between the two countries. This agreement came about after the UK government of the time – the Blair cabinet and Northern Ireland Minister, Mo Mowlam - began to listen to the opposing point of view. Mo Mowlam famously went into prisons and spoke to convicted terrorists and heard their concerns. The previous government’s stance of ‘we don’t talk to terrorists’ had resulted in no movement and a catastrophic loss of lives. Mo Mowlam and the Blair government demonstrated that we can listen to an opposing viewpoint, recognise what’s valid in it, without condoning their actions, and in doing so we can find new ways forwards.
I won’t pretend to fully understand the complex histories between Israel and Palestine, but I do know there are two sides to every story, and on both sides are ordinary people, good people, passionate about what they believe is right and just for their loved ones and communities, trying to do the best for their kids, devastated and frightened and hurt by what’s happening around them.
Taking it to the micro level, we would never teach a child in kindergarten to respond to violence with violence, so why do we think this should work for adults? The only way to resolve conflict is by talking and – much more importantly - by listening. By being willing to concede that our version of reality is not the whole picture.
Dialectical thinking is helping to keep my mind open in the face of disappointing results here at home. Can I challenge myself to find what’s valid and useful in the other side of the political spectrum? Can you? And what kind of world would we live in if we operated from this place? A place of cooperation over conflict, listening over persuading, being willing to be surprised. Being willing not to be the truth-holder. Being willing to acknowledge that our point of view is always incomplete. Being willing to seek the kernel of truth in the other’s position.
Next time you’re in conflict with your partner, your family, your colleagues, take a moment to pause and really hear what’s valid in the other point of view. It starts on the micro level.
Wishing you peace and safety, wherever you are 🙏
Thank you for reading. If you find anything here useful, do take the time to like, comment and share this post, and please become a free subscriber if you’d like to hear more.
Some writing on the middle eastern conflict that moved me this week……
The view from my window in Gaza by Mosab Abu Toha - New York Times
Why you might have lost all your Jewish friends this week and didn’t even know it by Josh Gilman
I love it, too, Vicki. I feel like sending it to our politicians! And others. I love this line in particular: 'What if the other side might hold a piece of the puzzle that your own blinkered world-view has neglected to consider?' Says it all, for us all, and me too.
I love this, Vicki. While I struggle to apply this approach to current events at the moment, I’m at least learning to do it in personal relationships and daily interactions. As you say, that’s exactly where it begins.