Our country is divided in ways not seen since the Viet Nam War protests. Several major cities have been besieged by both peaceful and violent protestors. Some of these who are gathering in the streets are justifiably angry, some are merely opportunistic, and some are swept up by the passion of the mob without real understanding of the issues.
What part can we Elders, possessors of wisdom, play in the necessary healing?
I have made a decision: to extricate myself from “group think.” Although I have not left my political party, I have acquired the attitude of an independent voter.
I had noticed the phenomenon of group think at work in the divisive and angry political dialogue, but a recent sermon crystallized my understanding, that members of the political parties are engaging in “group think.”
My minister did not specifically mention politics in his sermon, but I could easily apply what he said to them. Afterwards, I searched for “group think” and found a definition (a psychological phenomenon when people strive for consensus, even setting aside their own personal beliefs and adopting the opinions of the rest of the group). I also found a list of characteristics (https://www.verywellmind.com/).
Sheepishly, I confess that I could immediately see these characteristics in the party for whom I do not vote. I did not apply these traits to myself, until I realized that I have fully participated in one of them, demonizing out-group members. This has meant thinking that members of this party are irrational and even believing that all the traits of group think belong solely to that opposing party.
This realization made me look again at the signs of group think:
1. Illusions of invulnerability/Unquestioned beliefs: I believe my party is always
right and that the platform is inviolate.
2. Rationalizing: even when I have concerns about some of my party’s stances, I ignore those concerns and refuse to reconsider my beliefs.
3. Stereotyping: I believe all members of the opposing party are, at least, misguided, and, at worst, delusional. I do not consider or even listen to their ideas.
4. Self-censorship: I am careful not to offer ideas that are contrary to the party line, but believe the party must be right.
5. I accept “Mindguards” (self-appointed censors to hide problematic information from the group). This means I only watch news programs or read articles produced or written by those who agree with me. I refuse to read or watch productions of the opposing party.
6. Illusions of unanimity: I believe that everyone in my party believes the party line, and so I find it difficult to disagree.
7. Direct pressure to conform is often placed on members who pose questions. If a member of my party disagrees, I doubt that they are bona fide party members.
The reality is that both parties foster group think, ignoring or censoring contrary opinions, selling their platforms and methods as inviolate. Group think makes compromise impossible, resulting in paralysis of action; we can see its effects clearly in the stalemate that frequently occurs in our Congress.
It is also seen in the emergence of the “cancel culture.” This trend is group think carried to an extreme, where out-group members are demonized and/or pressured to conform. It is a powerful and alarming weapon used against dissent, and has resulted in loss of jobs and reputation. But it has also harmed our nation, for it has crippled debate and free speech, and it has furthered the group think bubble of invulnerability and unquestioned beliefs.
But, as an informed voter, I have a responsibility to educate myself about both sides of the issues. I no longer accept as gospel the platform, statements, editorials, and ads of one party. I investigate both sides and then determine the one with which I agree. I no longer self-censor.
I have found some ways to understand both sides. I confess that I still will not view the cable news programs of the other party, but there are sources that give me an opportunity to learn the positions of both parties. I have found Real Clear Politics (https://www.realclearpolitics.com) to be especially helpful. This website pairs articles on a variety of subjects; one article is written by a liberal, and the other, by a conservative. Reading both articles gives me a clear idea of the issues, and of the differences in the points of view.
Another method I use is to listen to Hugh Hewitt’s morning talk show. Hewitt is a conservative, but he also writes for the Washington Post, has had a show on MSNBC, and frequently appears on Meet the Press. He often has liberal guests on his show, including Chuck Todd of NBC and Michael Shear of The New York Times. Their conversations are respectful, even when they disagree; they are a model of the way liberals and conservatives can begin to understand one another, begin to seek common ground.
Finally, every political candidate has a website, and there I find a store of information about promises and platforms.
When I have political discussions with friends, I let them know I am open to hearing their viewpoints. I have found that this stance enables me to have good and respectful conversations with members of both political parties. I am able to ask honest questions about issues, raise concerns about platforms and talking points, probe the reason for a party member’s loyalty. If I identified as a member of the same party, we would simply agree. If I identified as a member of the opposing party, we would not have a conversation at all.
This attitude of openness, exploring the good and bad about both platforms and candidates, is also an attitude I would hope we, as the Elders, would pass on to our children and grandchildren. It is especially important that we calmly and respectfully ask questions designed to lead them to independent thinking, to help them avoid the group think talking points that can lead to irreparable damage to our nation, and to them.
I believe that it is incumbent on voters to be informed, to understand both sides of the issue, and avoid simply going along with a particular party. As a result, I have become a truly independent voter – listening carefully to the candidates, becoming familiar with party platforms, and rejecting group think.
10/8/2020