Category Archives: politics

What Anger Makes Us

Posted on by
Reply
Trail near The Lodge at Whitefish Lake, Whitefish, Montana

Dear Readers,
I wish you all the curious, thoughtful, open, and loving friends like I have!
The same person I mentioned in “What Does Love Make Us?”, Sean, helped inspire this post tonight, coaxing insights to emerge just by being his curious, thoughtful, open, and loving self. Earlier I wrote a brief list of what I think love makes us:
Vulnerable. Courageous. Powerful. Forgive. Willing. Selfless. Grow. Better.

So what does anger make us? A dichotomy emerged in conversation today:

Adversaries
We see it everywhere: Rage poured forth, one person onto another, groups against each other. It’s us against them, no question, no nuance, no reflection, ‘no quarter.’ Yikes.

It’s understandable, of course, and sometimes even justified, this adversarial mindset and approach to the opposition, ‘the enemy’. Longstanding experiences of socially accepted marginalization, dismissal, and oppression fester and seethe, then spew forth like pus under pressure. As with any abscess, lancing that pent up wrath relieves pain, even as the initial incision stings momentarily.

Then we ‘go to war,’ as some might say. We ‘fight’. We take both an offensive and defensive stance, we weaponize our words, and we make all the worst assumptions of those we pre-judge as against us. We close our minds to alternative perspectives, plow forward with agendas that we believe can only be achieved by vanquishing all who resist. Even if our mindset is not this extreme, we risk sliding down that slippery slope. Abstraction and dehumanization of anyone ‘on the other side’ happens all too easily, my friends, and the louder the adversarial voices around us, the more pressure we feel to follow suit.

Where and what does this get us?

Looking back on my own life, on policy and human history, I can think of few tangible examples where the adversarial approach has benefited us, individuals and the collective alike, in the long run. And when it does, the costs are extraordinarily high, often borne by those with the least power or choice. Death, destruction, trauma, and lives irrevocably shattered–the adversarial route of anger scorches the earth.

Advocates
I have a friend who exudes rage and has suffered relationship and reputation damage from it. It makes me cringe because I understand the origin of their anger as protectiveness, righteous outrage on behalf of others, and a belly full of fire to do good.

I have also witnessed them advocate for their causes with diplomatic, almost loving assertiveness toward total strangers. They are bold but respectful, strong and friendly, a force of nature, like a stiff wind that envelopes and nudges you firmly but not forcefully from behind, getting you to where you might have been going just a little faster and with more urgency. People receive their words and advocacy with openness, curiosity, and a willingness to consider action; how often do you see interactions like this?

In January I wrote “Tested and Called“, feeling angry and a little hopeless after Alex Pretti’s murder by border patrol agents. It was my first documented “DIY pep talk“, I see now. I wrote about anger and courage, ‘hope’s two daughters.’ I reminded myself that in the face of all that makes me angry, I can and must continue to show up and ‘fight’ for things and people I care about. Better writers than I have made the distinction between fighting for and fighting against. It’s a subtle attitude shift that matters.

Fighting against–being adversarial–too easily devolves into ad hominem and caustic division: name calling, shaming, othering, dismissing, dehumanizing, and even violence. The external focus and negative energy depletes us, and when we see little to no progress we burn out. Fighting for, or advocacy, on the other hand, carries a light from within, an intrinsic motivation of renewable energy, fostered and amplified when any progress is made. Advocacy attracts allies, grows a movement, and creates sustained and sustainable change agency.

The language of advocacy centers the cause, not the opposition. It informs, educates, inspires, and empowers. Advocacy demands accountability of the systems it seeks to change, as well as its own advocates themselves. The strongest and most effective advocates strive always to walk the talk.

I have written this blog for eleven years. Surely there are posts that I would not write, or write differently, today compared to when they were published. Information evolves, and I along with it. My attitudes and opinions change with age and experience. But I can stand with confidence by the intent of every post here as non-adversarial advocacy of some kind–even when the execution misses the mark. I look for others with a similar ethos, especially in medicine and science.

Whom do you admire for their non-adversarial advocacy?
What good do you see them doing in the world?
How can we amplify them?

Below are Instagram accounts that I follow for their strong advocacy in the face of threats to the integrity of our scientific and medical institutions. Some of their posts verge on adversarial, but for the most part I perceive an earnest, professional, and evidence-based mission to protect public safety. And of course I think of Braver Angels and Builders for their work to bridge division and move us away from adversarial political engagement.

Lastly, apologies for this second delayed post–life! Quality time with Son and Daughter, both home from college, took precedence over sitting at the laptop. Worth it! May we all have such meaningful and fulfilling choices to make!

Fired But Fighting

Illinois Department of Public Health

Stand Up For Science!

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)

DogGlauc: Will Flanary, MD

In Person, Face to Face, One on One: Crowns Lesson #3

Posted on by
1
“Openness to our minds changing is NOT weakness. It is the strength of intellectual humility.”

How do you come to really understand and know anyone, then overcome differences?

Many of my friendships have begun remotely–on Facebook, this blog, interest groups, even on the phone. But they do not solidify until we meet in person. It is the natural progression of relationship, to be in each other’s presence. The energy is profoundly different, the connection tangible and tactile.

Throughout the Crowns Trilogy, relationships develop and transform through repeated in person meetings, between lovers, adversaries, allies, strangers, and family members. Communication occurs through letters and messengers, posture and political actions, but it is the face to face encounters that challenge biases, build trust, and solidify alliances. Repeated rupture and repair in indispensible relationships, committed and restored in person through words, expressions, or acts, reminds us that there is no substitute modality for true connection.

Physical proximity is not enough. Connection requires emotional and psychological presence, the offering and acceptance of attention, and the mutual willingness to engage in good faith.

The main characters in Crowns overcome traumatic and tragic barriers to connect, and save their kingdoms, driven by two primary motives: Love and Peace. Why can’t we do the same? Norah, Mikhail, Alexander, and Soren engage one another and also themselves with intensity, ambivalence, and serious conflict. But they keep showing up, never abandoning their commitments to do the necessary bridging work for the people and causes that matter most to them. Consider how the following patterns apply to your encounters with people who disagree with you, politically or in any other domain. Can we practice these for the sake of love, peace, and saving ourselves from one another?

Multiple meetings. Important issues almost never resolve in one try. Anyone who leads knows this. The larger and more complex the organization or issue, the more iterative the solutions necessarily must be. Sustainable progress only occurs when participants practice transparency, honesty, and accountability. This requires vulnerability, courage, and a willingness to compromise over time. Sometimes meeting is unavoidable, such as in family or workplaces. We can choose to stonewall or refuse to engage in this case, but that is not an option for connection and conflict resolution. Concerted effort in repeated negatiation and exchange in good faith–diplomacy–is a life skill.

Cultivating connection. All of the above does not emerge immediately. We humans sense threat and danger acutely. It takes multiple meetings to prove safety and earn trust, during which commitments are honored and confidences kept. This is how relationships are built. I identify with Norah in Crowns because she is so often the one initiating and sustaining contact and engagement, and she almost never declines invitations offered by others. She exercises patience, persistence, and celebration of any progress, as do I.

Mutual respect. Over and again, Norha, Mikhail, Alexander, and Soren recognize and acknowledge their rivals’ strengths and merits. They and the supporting characters exercise objectivity in assessing one another’s achievements. When in the other’s domain, each learns and adheres to customs therein, even as they disagree with the beliefs behind them. There can be no peace or lasting conflict resolution without mutual respect.

Commitment to possibility despite heavy resistance. Countless times others tell Norah that peace is not possible, that war and death are inevitable, that people and systems cannot change. They cling to wariness and stubborn disbelief, rigid negative assumptions and prejudices as if they are immutable truths. But she holds possibility in front, with the primary assumption of and commitment to preserving shared humanity. Because of her advocacy and mediation, spanning the boundaries of belief and experience, the others eventually, begrudgingly, recognize and acknowledge the limitations of their prejudices and come around. Her idealism overcomes their cynicism and wins the day.

In the end everything has a cost.
Polarization, division, and mutual adversarial attempts to vanquish the opposition, at their worst, cost lives, whether through small violent confrontations or full on war. Social, operational, and economic costs also escalate, with lasting deleterious effects.

What does bridging work cost? For us regular people, it costs our comfort, for sure. It takes time, energy, and even resources to acquire and practice the skills. What would bridging work cost elected leaders, in addition? What if they all sat down in person, face to face, one on one, more often and earnestly?

What are the costs of not bridging our differences? I have heard too many stories of relationships torn apart by unresolved disagreements; the loss and grief are real and tragic. Openness in relationships also suffers, causing people to self-censor honest expression for the sake of ‘keeping the peace’–a fragile and hollow peace. These psychological and relational costs are exactly what fester and fray our social and personal fabric.

We all get to decide what benefits of bridging work are worth what costs to ourselves. I am convinced that in order to elect leaders who possess the skills and capacity to engage regularly, respectfully, and in good faith, we must be willing to do so ourselves, as citizens. It is now the era when we regular people must lead by example.

Because if not us, then who?

Crowns Trilogy: The Most Meaningful Fiction of My Life Yet

Posted on by
Reply

What stories do you consume repeatedly? What drives this?

I have alluded to the Crowns Trilogy by Nicola Tyche a few times since I first listened back in November. Tonight I’m five hours away from finishing my fifth binge of the entire series since then. How fascinating!

Regular and long time readers of this blog will recognize other books with this kind of record in my history, such as The Art of Possibility and Start With Why. Recently the novels Beastly Beauty and Never the Roses have left deep impressions on me. The thread tying them all together, of course, is the centrality of relationship and integrity to oneself and one’s core values, and how this then shapes our connections to others. That theme certainly persists in Crowns, but its impact feels deeper, more acute, and I could not fully articulate why until these past weeks. Many thanks to my dear friends who have helped me put it into these early coherent words. I had already identified that it was the utter accuracy and completeness of the story’s depiction of humanity–its tender, messy, violent, complex, and paradoxical nature, that strikes me. But all good fiction does that. What is it about Crowns that hooks me so deeply?

First Sharon asked me, after hearing me gush about the writing, to describe specifically what I love about it. First, active verbs, hallelujah! Then the dialogue, the banter, the clever and subtle humor. Then the performances. Katherine Kennard, Connor Brannigan, and Zach Lazar Hoffman voice all of the characters with both technical precision and emotional depth. I imagine the writing made it easy for them to embody the characters, because the words are evocative. Fear, anger, devotion, anguish, loyalty, conviction, ambivalence, and, of course love–the characters’ conveyence of all these emotions and more spring from each chapter right into my amygdala, sparking it in ways I may have never experienced before from a book.

Phara first introduced this series to me, and I shared widely and immediately. Donna and Anna both loved it and we finally gathered to discuss last Thursday. For two hours we professed our admiration for Norah, the strong back, soft front heroine and our love for Mikhail, the utterly romantic hero we all wished to know better. We gushed over the loyal and tragic Alexander and his fun and lighthearted brother Adrian. But we saved our greatest devotion for Soren, for the depth and complexity of his character and the scope of his arc as the strongest and most lovable (in our opinion) hero of all. I named our group chat Sorenettes. Asked again, so lovingly, why this series affects me so, I was able to get to how the characters all show us how we can change our minds about people, groups, and ideas, and the inherited and established assumptions that we had previously held as immutable truths. This story gives me hope for connection despite serious barriers.

But it was Sean, whom I referenced in another post centered on Crowns back in December, who really cracked it open for me two days ago. Meeting in the Den at Ethos before our strength class, Sean’s face postively lit up when he asked, “Cathy, five times?” Remarkable and outstanding. I was queried again, invited enthusiastically to go deeper yet. And then it emerged: validation. Crowns hits me squarely at my Why, which is connection, especially across difference. Over three long books and over 40 hours of narration, the sweeping epic that spans kingdoms at war, a tragic love triangle, and the full scope of human emotion, the characters persist and finally triumph in the work of connection, despite myriad forces that oppose and threaten it, even mortally. What cosmic fortune that Phara gifted me this trilogy just when the world feels so lost to our ability to connect in general, and especially across any differences.

The insights have continued to roll out over the weekend. There’s too much to write tonight; I’ll have to do it all in chunks! That feels right–I want to savor the continuous processing, unfolding, emergence, and integration of meaning and synthesis that this story evokes. I already have at least three posts in draft, which I look forward to fleshing out: Rupture and Repair, Clinging to Our Beliefs, The Freedom of Being Seen and Known… OH, I could probably right a post a day this November based on quotes and passages!

My current thesis statement of the Crowns impact on me:
It is our face to face, one-on-one, personal connections, forged with continuous and concerted effort, patiently over time, despite both internal and external barriers and resistance, that save us. These connections require openness, curiosity, honesty, empathy, integrity, and humility from us all, and when grounded in love, they can overcome almost any division, I am convinced.

What relationships in your life fit this description?

Interestingly, jar smile writing slowed down unexpectedly and disconcertingly these last few weeks. I sat down most nights with the intense desire to write, then found myself uninspired for the usual love notes. Fascinating. I managed to sputter out some decent ones for the Ethos jar before finally hearing the call. Lessons and insights from Love Your Enemies and Crowns swirl together like the sweetest soft serve ice cream in my head and heart, and that’s what I need to put into jars right now. I feel people’s desire for less adversarial, calmer, and more thoughtful discourse. I sense the distress so many feel that it may be a lost cause. It is not! There is hope! And I can literally ‘bottle it’ for us! I posted on Instagram tonight:

“Prepping to write mini jars of love notes for bridging work. Anybody want one?”
“We must mind our assumptions of others’ motivations. Ask what they *care* about before what they hate.”
“22 tiny encouragemennts to bridge our differences; will send to someone wililng to receive.”

The first jar is already spoken for, and I feel inspiration rising to continue and persist.

So much good work to do, my friends. And I cannot think of a better way to do it than together. Epic love stories and tiny love notes help, of course.