How to Stop Avoiding Conversations about Politics
Confession: My job is almost entirely about helping people have difficult or meaningful conversations—and even so, I actively avoid talking politics with people who disagree with my views. I don’t feel good admitting that, but I doubt I’m alone.
My reasons for dodging these conversations are numerous, but I suspect a big reason is that I don’t want to be judged for my opinions, and I don’t want others to feel I’m judging them. Better to avoid the topics altogether, right?
Except, no. Avoiding these topics may be easier, but we also might miss out on moments that could challenge, teach, or even surprise us.
So how do we have conversations about red button topics in ways that don’t reek of judgment? In ways that respect the other person?
My adviser on this topic is Garrett Bucks, founder of the Barnraisers Project and author of The White Pages newsletter and the new book The Right Kind of White.
Garrett’s answer to my question is this—if you want to have real conversations you have to give up the objective of persuading the other person (at least in the first conversation), and instead ask questions with real curiosity. Garret says the difference between the most successful and least successful conversations on divisive topics hinges on authentic curiosity.
“The more conversations I have that are actually vulnerable, interesting, and which give me insights into how people—both those with similar backgrounds from me and those with very different identity markers—are navigating our shared world, the more energy I have for more of those conversations. And you know how I get interesting answers? By asking interesting questions, ones that the other person is more likely to answer honestly and reflectively.”
Notice the use of the word vulnerable. To ask a vulnerable question means not knowing the answer in advance. Vulnerable questions have answers that may surprise me, causing me to think differently. To engage with vulnerability around political conversations is to engage knowing that while you’re unlikely to shift your perspective overall, you may find cracks in your theories, fallacies in your thinking, or unexpected points of agreement with the other side. Engaging this way means accepting that the other side has rational perspectives.
Questions for vulnerable and authentic engagement
Garrett’s newsletter from earlier this month included some questions you could use to launch your own vulnerable conversations. I share them with his permission
So, I already told you that I’m on ________ side of this issue. What pisses you most off about people like me?
So, you told me that you believe _______ politically. What were two big moments in your life that influenced that belief?
What’s one thing that government either is or isn’t doing right now that, if it were to change tomorrow, would have the largest positive influence in your day-to-day life?
What are you most afraid of your government doing— either to you or somebody you care about? Where does that fear come from?
When you think of somebody in your community who is actually making life better for others, what are they doing?
When you hear me say “I wish that you’d take my stance on _____ issue” what feels most risky and scary about doing so? What would you have to give up? What would you risk? What about your perspective are you worried I might not understand?
Are there any moments, on this particular issue, when you doubt the position you’ve taken? Why or why not?
There’s a time and a place for making your case and arguing your perspective. We need that. But it’s rarely the way to win hearts and minds, especially in one-on-one conversation. When the topics really matter, it helps to slow the conversation down and ask authentic, vulnerable questions instead.
—
Subscribe to Garrett’s newsletter. Or, if you are a white person who wants to organize other white people on behalf of racial justice and the collective good, consider signing up for a Barnraisers cohort.
