We give our power away too easily.
We break the four agreements and make assumptions about outcomes that bring our minds into premature suffering.
We take things personally when others choose a view or belief that doesn’t match our own. We interpret their stance as anti-us rather than try on their viewpoint to understand why they think differently.
We don’t pause to think about what they may be trying to protect for themselves. We employ a scarcity mentality that divides our choices into this or that without employing broader, creative thinking about how we can coexist and find common ground.
When things get intense, we choose judgment over curiosity.
If ever there were a time to employ all of the lessons we’ve discussed in Warrior by Day for the past xx weeks, I’d say today is a prime candidate (see what I did there?)
The thread throughout these WBD posts has been rooted in my fundamental belief that people can change, not just their behaviors, but their beliefs.
Alongside this belief that change is possible is my belief that is absolutely necessary for us to continue to evolve as individuals and as a society.
The ballots we cast on election day are given more weight than they deserve.
The power in our minds and hearts to create change and do good on a community level has been underestimated and it is time to release that power.
We will need it more than ever, no matter what the outcome is after this week is over.
No matter which candidate wins the office of President of the United States, half of our country will feel unseen, unheard, betrayed, angry and scared.
The interesting thing is, these feelings have been fueling political debate and the choices people make in their candidates the whole time.
In this particular election, my sense is that many of the decisions on who to vote for are being fueled by anger and fear versus inspiration and connection to an individual in whom we really believe.
When the winner is revealed, 50% of our population may have a slightly greater feeling of hope, but there will still be uncertainty.
There is always uncertainty when it comes to promises made under duress and pressure to conform to a party versus having the ability to stand confidently on one’s values.
The problem is, the other half of our country (or more) will still be pissed off and feel unseen.
It is folly to presume that one person (or even 539 people) can make the changes we desire on a community level.
What if, regardless of which candidate wins, we, the people, commit to turn within ourselves and toward one another and ask the hard questions–
”Why do you feel this way?”
“Why did you feel that this person was the best person for the job?”
“What are you afraid of?”
“What is most important to you, and why?”
“How can I support you?”
“Can we agree to disagree?”
“Let’s focus on the things we have in common and amplify our efforts in those areas.”
There are answers to these questions. There are reasons that the country is almost literally divided in half. This is a problem.
We will never be able to create any kind of consensus when we haven’t taken the time to understand one another’s perspectives.
As I wrote in the post “Fall off the other side of the beam,” moving forward towards a future where we have at least a modicum of alignment and a fragment of less division, will require us to think differently, to be curious rather than judgmental, to ask questions and, as Adam Grant suggests, “think like a scientist.”
Grant is an organizational psychologist who recently wrote a book called “Think Again” which essentially has all of the same aims I outlined regarding our ability to put aside our pride and limiting beliefs and embrace a scientist mindset.
In an interview with “Greater Good” magazine (full link here), Grant talks specifically about the 4 types of mindsetsthat can can make or break our ability to broaden our views: preacher, prosecutor, politician and scientist. Grant says,
“When we’re in preacher mode, we’re convinced we’re right; when we’re in prosecutor mode, we’re trying to prove someone else wrong, when we’re in politician mode we’re trying to win the approval of our audience.
Each of these mental modes can stand in the way of “thinking again,” because in preacher and prosecutor mode, I’m right and you’re wrong, and I don’t need to change my mind.
In politician mode, I might tell you what you want to hear, but I’m probably not changing what I really think; I’m posturing as opposed to rethinking.
Thinking like a scientist…means that you favor humility over pride and curiosity over conviction. You know what you don’t know, and you’re eager to discover new things.
You don’t let your ideas become your identity.
You look for reasons why you might be wrong, not just reasons why you must be right.
You listen to ideas that make you think hard, not just the ones that make you feel good.
And you surround yourself with people who can challenge your process, not just the ones who agree with your conclusion.”
The interview also includes helpful advice from Grant specific to “rethinking” political discussions:
“So many of us fall into binary bias, and we only focus on the most extreme version of the other side, which is a caricature, where we say they’re either dumb or bad. If you let go of that, there’s a whole complex spectrum and many shades of gray between these two
political extremes.
Peter Coleman’s research shows that, instead of introducing a complex topic like abortion or guns or climate change as representing two sides of the coin, if you can encourage people to think about it through the many lenses of a prism, they become more nuanced and less polarized, and they’re more likely to find common ground.
Any time you see someone creating an “us versus them” dichotomy, you can ask, “What’s the third angle, what’s the fourth lens on that?” That gives people the chance to belong to multiple belief systems and to open their mind to multiple ideas, as opposed to
sticking to one.”
I found Grant’s perspective very insightful and complimentary to the mindset shifts I have written about in Warrior by Day.
No matter what happens this week, I truly believe we will be okay, and that we can be even better than okay if we take back our own power to create change, compassion and acceptance on an individual level.
It is not a small group of people on Capitol Hill who make all of the decisions.
We get the chance to make decisions every day in how we choose to think, act and treat other people.
We get to choose what we do with our time to try and make our country a better place to live.
We can use our power and agency every day to be kind, to listen, to seek to understand before seeking to be understood, to volunteer, to donate, to set an example, and hopefully to fall in love with our country again, with all of its flaws, the same way we
accept and embrace our flawed selves and fellow humans.
My vote is for each and every one of us to create a ripple effect that reminds us all we are more similar than different and that we have more power than we think we do to create the changes we so desperately desire.
You may say I’m a dreamer, but I can’t possibly be the only one.