Accepting VS Judging: Creating Civil Discourse

Everyone has the freedom to hold on to their own truths and beliefs, but how they react when meeting others with contradicting ideas defines the difference between being accepting or judgmental. In this segment, host Bill Stierle and co-host Tom dive deep on the challenge of having a civil discourse with others about sensitive subjects, political or otherwise. They discuss the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of closing conflicts as opposed to speaking in the language of hypocrisy. Make connections despite disagreements and see the human being in everyone in this episode.

---

Watch the episode here

Bill, did you have a great 4th of July holiday?

I did have a great 4th. I spent some time in San Diego, took it easy, watched the fireworks, had some great food and visited with some. That was a wonderful time.

I had a great time too. I was out in Rhode Island and then down in New York City. I know this is grounding this episode in time a little bit which we try not to do. It’s not important to the subject we’re going to talk about but there are a lot of events that occurred over this extended 4th of July weekend holiday. I was watching some Wimbledon tennis, which was fun. There’s an American phenom, a fifteen-year-old who did very well. A lot of great things were going on at Wimbledon. There was also the Women’s FIFA World Cup.

That was exciting to see although not without some controversy along the way of running up the score, of celebrations for goals but they won. I was in New York when they had this ticker-tape parade in Manhattan. I thought it would be a great subject to talk about, Bill, because one of the things we try to figure out is how to have safe conversations, how to have productive conversations, civil discourse with others about sensitive subjects, political or otherwise. More often, the political ones tend to be fraught with landmines maybe people don’t expect.

The challenge of having a civil discourse is that there’s got to be some form of acceptance that happens between human beings. It’s challenging because one of the problems that we have is in our modern age, we’re not very accepting of the differences the way we used to be. We used to have a greater sense of acceptance and tolerance for people that were different than us and people that thought differently than we did. Human beings do like the familiarity of being and living in communities that are similar to us. They have similar beliefs, but judging another community, judging another person’s behavior was something not. We were more of an inclusion or a collaborative style welcoming everybody in rather than saying one group is better than the next group. That’s where we’re getting into a little bit of trouble.

I see it so often. The place I see it the most is in social media. Sometimes I’m surprised and maybe I shouldn’t be especially with the conversations you and I have a lot. I get surprised when somebody posts a message, let’s say on Facebook, that is intended to be positive, uplifting and apolitical. They’re not trying to make a political statement. How quickly the comments go back and forth and the conversation devolves and it gets to divisive. I see this happen a lot and we do need to try to have civil discourse and safe conversations with each other about important subjects, especially when it comes to politics. Our country here in the United States and many aspects of it, I’m surprised sometimes that what will set people off. How others will try to purchase truth to push their agenda from what was a positive message.

There are a couple of things to unpack in what you said. The first thing is how sensitive languages that people who have a sensitivity to language even more so than they did in the past. We’re much quicker to a fight response, a flight response, not engagement. A freeze response, shutting up and not saying anything around a dinner with friends because we’re afraid that somebody might take something the wrong way. Instead of moving on from the topic, if we don’t want to get into it or learning how to close a conflict and be okay with while you believe this, I believe this and it doesn’t have to affect our friendship.

If you think about people that have had great experiences with each other in college, in our adult life or in our work life and we’ve had these great experiences. One thing happens and it throws all of those positive experiences into this rubble pile saying, “We had this falling out.” What’s a falling out? The falling out is my brain reacted in an adversarial way, started treating them as an enemy or developed an enemy image in their direction. They’re not an ally of ours. They’re an enemy of ours. They’re not loyal to us in our values but they’re loyal to the values of the other side, which is mostly not true. There can be a nuance to that. On a scale of one to ten, they’re more conservative or more liberal. It doesn’t mean that they’re in this other tribe.

The problem is developing a language of truth that has a sense of awareness that one of those trigger moments took place and then upgrade the language on our side so that we diffuse what is happening on the other side. For example, on a Facebook post, somebody might start using profanity or start using a monologue about a belief structure that they think that we have. They read two or three of our posts. They think that we believe 100% this way, therefore we’re on this other tribe. How to train our brain and our language to speak and gently shift one function. You shift it from judgment to observation. Many philosophers have talked about this. Many religious spiritual people have talked about this. One quote that is one of my favorites is, “The highest form of intelligence is the ability to observe without judgment.”

That’s very astute, Bill. It’s very hard to do for people.

The highest form of intelligence is the ability to observe without judgment.

CLICK TO TWEET

Our language doesn’t allow us to do it. That’s even worse. It’s not just hard. As soon as you have a label, a thought, a judgment or a diagnosis, you’re already off of observation. We’ve talked about the power of observation, but in a Facebook quote, you could mention the quote that the soccer player mentioned. Because the soccer player has an opinion about something and has made a choice about something, they mitigate or eliminate the quote that the soccer player and what the soccer player is all about. The soccer player is on the other team and they’re not on our team anymore.



On the day that the Women’s US National Soccer team had their celebration parade in New York City, they went to the steps of the City Hall in New York. A few of the players spoke from the podium. One of those being Megan Rapinoe who was the most senior member of the team. She’s been there the longest. In the final scoring of that last goal, she tied or exceeded the most goals ever scored in history in terms of that type of soccer. Clearly, she’s quite a soccer player. Our mutual friend on Facebook posted this quote and a link to the video of her speech on Facebook. Here’s the quote, this is Megan Rapinoe, US Women’s Soccer co-captain is what she is. “We have to be better. We have to love more, hate less. We’ve got to listen more and talk less. We’ve got to know that this is everybody’s responsibility. It’s our responsibility to make the world a better place.”

Regardless of what you think of Megan Rapinoe, the person, the soccer player, the maybe activist, if she’s becoming, that’s a positive, uplifting message. I thought, “That’s great. I’m so glad we’re celebrating their victory.” When I have watched over the days since hundreds of comments on this post, I see people trying to hijack or purchase truth and take it out of observation and into criticism, labeling and diagnosis. Some of the people were saying things like, “They refuse to go to the White House, that’s unpatriotic. They can try to make themselves look good speaking from the city hall.” Other things like, “She’s a hypocrite because of the things she talks and doesn’t listen to herself directly going after part of her quote.”

The quote, “You’re the person that talks. You’re the person that’s not listening.”

The author of the post, she didn’t expect this. She says, “Why so many haters?” It’s one of her rebuttal comments on Facebook posts.

I was disappointed to see it too. Bill, what I’m wondering is, am I disappointed to see that because maybe I am more aligned with her team, meaning Megan Rapinoe to begin with than somebody who is not on her team. She’s not your person. Do you tend to be surprised at that more? Somebody who she’s not on my team will inherently be more critical and judgmental.

Here’s a couple. Let’s peel this back because there are three specific things going on here. Number one, the first thing that’s going on here has to do with, “Here’s my identity or who I am aligned with and I’ve put a lot of value into this identity. My identity has a right-wrong opinion about this. Once I’ve chosen that this person is wrong and I’m right, then what happens is I’ve got to keep seeing them through that filter because if I don’t see them through that filter, I have to own my judgmental self.” People don’t like to own their judgmental self. You’re holding the judgment. You’re the one that’s causing the pain. You’re the one that’s causing the disconnection. It’s a lot easier to label and diagnose somebody than it is to be compassionate towards somebody.

That is like a light bulb going on. 

It’s like, how can I be compassionate to what the message is instead of judge the message because I’m judging the deliverer of the message? This is when it gets wiggly very quick. It doesn’t matter the spiritual faith, all of the different spiritualities talk about the danger and something not to do is to judge someone else. Almost all are, don’t judge someone else. What are you doing judging this instead of observing the message which is essentially a spiritual inclusion message? That’s the message. It doesn’t matter who the deliverer is. This is when it gets weird too, if Jesus, Mohammad, Abraham, Moses or the Buddhist says it is, still the message is inclusion.

Kindness towards another person, acceptance of differences, tolerance of humanity and its diversity, that’s where the messages are. As I’m applying my observational thought and my observational mindset, things will go better for me. The audience is going, “How did you develop an observational mindset when our brain is filled with language that activates criticism, judgment and activates separation, labels and diagnoses that we get to put on other people?” That’s a big piece to catch and hold of here.

I love that word you use activates because it very well captures what happens to a lot of people. It’s almost subconscious, where certain language will activate something in them and cause a certain response. That points out how choosing your words carefully as you communicate with others is critical to maintaining a civil discourse.

People talk about and amplify losses or mistakes, not the wins.

CLICK TO TWEET

She may have a need for integrity that if she’s there people are going to associate her with the president and his values. Her need to be loyal to the United States is in conflict with her need for integrity, self-respect and other things I’m sure.



I’m going to do her pre and post media, before and after, “I’m a fierce independent individual and I see that as an American value of mine and a large part of me. About 80% of me does not want to go and visit with the president for a photo op. The way he speaks to other people and the values that he is talking about is something I don’t agree with. 90% of me does not want to go. I’m choosing to go to this event in order to honor America and honor the flag that I’m wearing on my uniform as the winner of the US team.” She goes to the event and the pictures are taken.

He says whatever he says. Post-conference, “I don’t agree with the things that the president says and the way he doesn’t meet my need for kindness and respect. Integrity is allowing me to talk this way because as a fierce independent, which many Americans are, I chose to honor America for half an hour that I was there for the photo opportunity. That’s a part of what I signed up for as a part of the American team and what I stand for. America has provided me the opportunity to be a fierce independent individual. At the same time, I do not respect the president and the things that he says towards others. The things he says doesn’t meet the need for kindness. The things he votes for doesn’t meet my specific needs for fairness and respect for women. I don’t agree with that at all.”

Notice she gets two more photo ops to talk about her point of view. She gets to honor the people and the haters. She’s honoring the people that are angry with her but she’s putting a marker of integrity on both sides. It’s a win for her. Her next message is, “Equality in pay is that thing that’s needed in America and as a fiercely independent individual that works on their professional skill in soccer, fairness to me looks like they’re getting paid this, we get paid this. We need to work towards that as rapidly as possible in United States, not for my own job as a professional athlete, but for theirs.”

She could have used a White House visit as an opportunity to shine a lot more light on those issues that she finds very important, couldn’t she?

That’s correct. Politically Bernie Sanders did that by going on Fox News. Pete Buttigieg did that by going on Fox News. I can appreciate that from Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris going because they don’t want to feed the beast.

It makes tons of sense and we live in a free country and people have the right to exercise their freedom of expression by not doing something, by not going to participate in something. It’s interesting how you’ve pointed out that while your first instinct might be to boycott something to shine a light on it, you might be able to achieve more by participating, approaching it with compassion, empathy and having more opportunity to achieve your personal goals.

There’s a way to do that, to engage in the process of it to have that, whether it takes a Colin Kaepernick to take a knee and the athlete to take a knee. On that thing, you could still book in that and still can reframe and frame those events so that you don’t give the other side any oxygen. That’s what’s happens if you’re not framing the event, the other side gets oxygen to say, “Wait a minute.” Other people say, “That’s right.” All of a sudden, you’ve got this entire spinoff.

I find it very interesting Bill, that you brought up Colin Kaepernick. Believe it or not, the discourse that took place in this Facebook post went from the US soccer team to Colin Kaepernick.

That’s what the pursuing of truth does. We’re pursuing it because many times, different parts of the truth are at odds with each other. The truth is that the American team salaries are being paid for it by the America team. That people are funding for Americans to play and go, Americans in the White House is a part of America. That’s true. Proportionally speaking, they might not agree with the American’s current format. I’m not agreeing with that. If I want to settle into this, it’s about $0.67 out of every tax dollar I pay goes to military or some form of defense. I don’t agree with that at all. I can vote my consciousness away from that. Some people do get scared into paying that amount of money for that. We do get scared like that. We are able to build a $14 million drone that gets to be shut down. Do you think I like my money getting shut down over Iraq? The person that would argue, we need to know what we’re doing. We have over 50 bases all around their entire country.

Message sent is not necessarily message received.

CLICK TO TWEET

It gets to a little more black and white thinking. 



It’s very much the way a twelve-year-old or thirteen-year-old thinks about this. It’s a funny thing to say. Your friend said this about me and therefore because your friends said this about me, it’s a twelve-year-old response. It’s the thirteen-year-old response. I’m not going to be your friend anymore because you said this, because this person said you said this. It’s like, “You’re talking about the need for respect. I get to talk to you that way because you’ve talked to me and my team that way.” It’s a fairness narrative instead of an honest narrative about mutual respect.

Compassion would look like mutual respect looks like and sounds like me not using profanity words. It would look like and sound like me going to the office of the president and taking the pictures because it represents America. You would like my behaviors and my attitudes to be congruent with the nation of inclusion. An inclusion looks like the president is an American. You’re an American. I’m an American. We’re all tolerating this guy. You would like me to go to demonstrate and be a model of toleration. Being a model of inclusion because I’m sending a message of inclusion if I go because he’s our guy because our guy got voted in.

It would be much more effective if people would think about it that way and approach it a little differently.

That’s the whole reason why we’re doing this show. It’s to have a healthy narrative so that a presidential candidate doesn’t have to look for their edge. They don’t have to look for the issue that they’re fighting for. They don’t have to go 20 years, 30 years or 50 years and say, “This thing is not right.” Finally, we elect him because we’re tired of hearing the message, or the message is finally being heard enough. This message is what mutual respect looks like. This message is what fairness looks like. This message is integrity looks like, “I can see how some people see this, but integrity to me looks like this.” We’re able to get there.

I’ve got another couple of comments here. This is a chain not too long and it’s subtle. This is why I want to bring this one up. It’s not the so-and-so drops the F-bomb and all this stuff. It’s more inflammatory. This to me is bias coming through. I want to see what you think about it. Remember that the quote up top, “We’ve got to listen more and talk less.” That was a part of that quote Megan Rapinoe said. This is somebody commenting and the rebuttal is the author of the post. This mutual friend that we talked about.

The comment who’s not the person who put this post up says, “She talks and talks. Not sure if she listens.” The author of the post replied to say, “Why so many haters?” That person comes back and says, “Why does she have to be in everyone’s face?” That to me is an interesting, subtle quote in a way of attacking Megan Rapinoe because clearly the person saying this doesn’t like her.

Interestingly, the other post comes back and says, “Let’s see. About a billion or so eyeballs have seen her and her team win the World Cup.” That’s why she is in everybody’s face. That’s why she’s getting all the media attention. 

Notice that truth doesn’t help. Let’s do the first pullback. The first pullback is read the first sentence and then watch what I say next.

“She talks and talks. Not sure if she listens.”

Could you be feeling doubtful, skeptical and you need to trust that this person is listening? You’ll also need some empathy for what it’s like not getting the acceptance and support you would like by her going to the White House. You would like her to listen more and not to be as outspoken as she is. Is that correct?

We can achieve a respectful civil discourse if we're more cognizant of the words we choose and approach things with compassion and empathy.

CLICK TO TWEET

I don’t want to grow up and be an adult. I have a seventeen-year-old at home, “You’ve got to become more independent, son. This is your identity. You’ve got to move forward. You’ve got to grow up.” He’s like, “I don’t want to grow up, dad. I want you to keep paying for stuff. You’re going to make me pay for things.” I’m going like, “That’s the way it works. Just gradually, not everything all at once. You’ve got to do a little bit more. Do some skills and then do some more. Do something for others and get paid and do some more and pay for more things. Eventually, you will be paying for yourself.” He’s like, “I have to write bills and I have to pay checks.” I’m like, “That’s why I got you a checking account so you can start paying for things.” He’s like, “Dad, I’d like to keep the money in my account.” I go, “Great strategy.” He’s saying, “I want you to keep paying for stuff and I want you to take it out of your account to pay for things but not out of mine.”



Bill, there’s another little comment that takes this discussion of the US Women’s Soccer team. It takes a twist on it that brings it into something that everyone in the United States was aware regarding the NFL and taking a knee during the National Anthem. The way you’ve talked about being able to see both sides of the situation, this is another one that that would apply to very well. This comment being critical in Megan Rapinoe says, “She takes a knee at sporting events in which she represents our country. Like it or not, that’s plain wrong. This isn’t the NFL.”

This is not the quote. I don’t know what that means because the NFL has debated whether that’s right or wrong too. This person finishes by saying, “There are plenty of other places to soapbox your causes.” It’s saying taking a knee in protest at a US national event or at an NFL game where the National Anthem is being played is plain wrong. Doesn’t that illustrate what we said about, to me patriotism means having the freedom to express myself and patriotism to you might be always standing during the National Anthem?

Think of it this way, Tom. People have a belief. There’s a time and a place for things and the time and the place to do protest is not in the middle of the American honoring America. Part of that is true. There is a time and the place. Regrettably, because we’ve lost the civil discourse, the time that’s available, called the time and the place. It’s hard to catch those windows of impact. People are spraying words the way a machine gun shoots bullets. They’re spraying thoughts and ideas. They’re hoping something lands somewhere instead of the mindful execution of communication, which here’s where the bad news. Most people don’t have the mindful execution of communication. That’s why we’re doing the show, how do you have the mindful execution of communication?

How do you bring your adult voice and you say to your child’s voice, “I don’t need you right now.” “I want to say whatever I want to say. My parents never let me speak up so I’m going to speak up in front of everybody.” We get the congruency of language with that person and empathize with them and say, “You would like us to hear that there’s a time and place to speak up and you would like us to hear there are better ways to fight for causes instead of the way that I’m choosing to fight for the cause. You would like me to have a better language in how I’m fighting for my cause. You would like me to prepare for how I’m fighting for my cause. You don’t want me to use profanity or labels and diagnoses. You don’t want me to call things out the way I see them. Is all that correct?

Yes.

I feel curious about what I said and how much you know about that.

I heard it all.

I’m glad you heard that. One of the biggest challenges is a message sent is not necessarily a message received. We want to make sure that we’re checking in with the delivery of the message. That goes back to one of the first quotes that you mentioned, “I don’t think she’s listening.” A person could be listening but they’re listening through a filter. They’re listening through their beliefs. Instead of empathizing with, because that’s where a deep listening takes place, they’re not doing that. What they’re doing is they’re listening through a point of view. That leads us to judgment, leads us to criticism, blaming, shaming, all of those things, start getting activated instead of something more alive and volatile.

Bill, I appreciate that. That keyword for me is activated. That’s a big one. If there was a word of the day, that would be it for me. It’s very helpful to understand that our language and communication skills have a significant impact on other people and how they respond and communicate with us. We can achieve a more respectful civil discourse or we can at least strive for it if we’re more cognizant of the words we’re choosing if we approach things with compassion and empathy. It’s been a great example of that. It did delve into political a little bit.

The message translates politically very easily. The nice part about the word activation is I want to activate, what is the core message underneath the message that they’re delivering? I’m activating, is it about mutual respect? Is this about being heard? Is it about integrity? That’s what the word hypocrite means, integrity. I want you to be integrity if you’re going to ask me for this thing, you’ve got to be doing the same thing you’re asking me for. The weird part about it is that people have a different scale of integrity and the next time the word integrity might be something that we take out for a spin to talk about, what does that mean to have integrity in a message? How do we create an identity that has integrity? What does integrity look like moving forward?

I think about that a lot. I had something occur in business with me where somebody offered to pay me money for something and I felt like I didn’t want to do that. I was not going to feel like I was not going to be in alignment with integrity in myself. I look forward to that discussion. 

This has been wonderful. Thanks a lot and looking forward to get back into it with a round of how truth and integrity play off of each other.

Thanks, Bill.