🇺🇸 I’m Going to Talk about Politics Now

How “polarities” can save us from polarization

Regardless of whom we voted for in this week’s presidential election, I bet most of us felt right. Maybe even righteous?

You cast your vote for the hero, hoping to defeat the villain. Your side stands for light. Theirs stands for darkness. We are right, they are wrong. We are righteous, they are forsaken.

And therein lies our problem.

---

Therein lies my problem. I’d be lying if I didn’t admit to thinking all those things myself this week.

But I’ve also learned to catch myself in that kind of thinking, because it represents its own kind of trap.

I won’t be demure about it: I voted for Kamala Harris. I felt devastated when she lost. I will feel devastated for months and years to come.

I lean moderate-left in general, but the primary feature driving my strong enthusiasm for Harris this election cycle is my strong aversion to Trump.

I stand by that aversion. I will never shrug my shoulders at Donald Trump’s rhetoric, nor will I wave off his behaviors (and some of his policies) that I find to be immoral, unethical, unkind, and even dangerous. I will always believe he is the wrong sort of character to hold the highest office in the land and the most influential political position on the planet.

BUT. Stay with me.

Where I get myself in trouble – and how I perpetuate the grave polarization happening in our country – is when I allow my aversion to Trump to translate into an aversion to anyone who voted for him.

When I oversimplify a very-not-simple socio-political landscape into easy-button categories that feel better to my brain - right/wrong, good/bad, conservative/liberal – I can’t appreciate the rich complexity of factors that lead a person to cast a vote. That lead a country to elect a candidate.

I can’t see the realities that are creating our shared reality. And if I can’t see the current reality for what it is, I sure as hell don’t stand a chance at helping to create the alternate reality I say I want.

“You can’t see what you don’t understand. But what you think you already understand, you’ll fail to notice.”

- from “The Overstory” by Richard Powers

When I think I already get the joke, the joke’s on me.  

In my leadership development work, I sometimes leverage a concept called “polarities”[1] with leaders and teams.

A “polarity” is an interdependent pair with inherent tension between them.

This interdependent pair consists of two seemingly opposing poles that require a “both/and” approach (versus an “either/or” one).

I guarantee that you just demonstrated an everyday example of a polarity, and you’re about to do it again. I’m talking about breathing.

Inhale. Exhale.

• Inhaling is not better than exhaling.

• Exhaling is not better than inhaling.

• You must do both.

• The UPSIDE of inhaling is getting oxygen.

• The UPSIDE of exhaling is expelling CO2.

• The DOWNSIDE of too much inhaling with too little exhaling is excessive CO2.

• The DOWNSIDE of too much exhaling with too little inhaling is a lack of oxygen.

These two poles don’t have to be in 50/50 balance all the time. In some situations, you’ll need longer inhales, while at other times, longer exhales will serve you better.

But on the whole, if you OVERDO inhaling at the expense of exhaling, or vice versa, you’ve got a problem.

---

How do polarities relate to leadership and to politics?

Often, we think we are facing a problem that needs to be solved, when really, we are facing a polarity that needs to be navigated, a tension we must hold in balance.

In leadership, this might look like navigating the polarities of:

• control vs. empowerment

• standardization vs. flexibility

• long-term results vs. short-term gains

Again, balancing these inherent tensions doesn’t mean doing each equally. It just means not overdoing one at the neglect of the other. You want to experience the UPSIDES of both without generating the DOWNSIDES of either.

I just started working with a new client, a non-profit executive named Cristen. Following our first session a couple of weeks ago, I sent her this article on polarities, thinking it could help with some leadership dynamics she raised in our conversation.

I heard back from her on Election Day. With her permission, I’m sharing what she wrote, which inspired me to write today’s post:

“I seriously think Polarity Thinking is an answer to our political division. We’ve been talking about it as polarization and that is bad, it decreases curiosity. But this [article] is saying polarities are necessary and so is the tension – we need both and we have to figure out how to work together. The idea that one side will solve any of the issues they claim to be able to is getting us stuck in “problem solving” rather than paradox and so many of them cannot be solved; or if they could be, they would require an interconnected thinking strategy.

How do we get a nation/city/neighborhood block to be thinking about and holding the tension of the challenges we face in an ongoing and curious manner, that centers humanity? How can this thinking be communicated and implemented more broadly and then leveraged as a relationship-community-solution building tool? How can this be used to move people from “I know I’m right” to “I’m curious about the tension and connection”?

Bingo, Cristen.

Polarization: rejecting the inherent tension between interdependent pairs, calling one good and the other bad

Polarities: embracing and working with the inherent tension to address complex issues

For example, a polarity inherent in the immigration debate is “border security” vs. “welcoming immigrants”. While some people may fully believe in one of those poles with abandon, most of us believe immigration policy requires some of both. We just disagree on the right mix.

When we dismiss people as either heartless or bleeding hearts depending their immigration views, we’re failing to account for the important nuances of the polarity at play in them.

Oh, and we get nowhere. 

We see the world not as it is, but as we are.

- Anais Nin

Photo by Kirsten Frank on Unsplash

As I was writing this article, I accidentally typed “polarities” as “polaritis”.

I love a good pun. The suffix “itis” means “inflammation of”, as in “appendicitis”.

So, I’m extrapolating that “polaritis” means “an inflammation of the poles”, which sounds like a pretty good description of the state of politics in our country.

How do we tame the inflammation?

Add the “e”. Turn “polaritis” into “polarities” and convert the “inflammation of the poles” into the “interplay of the poles”. Only then do we have any shot at working together to navigate the inherent tensions shaping our complex reality.

---

I know it’s a bummer, but this means you and I have got to stop judging and start getting curious.

Even if we will never agree with someone else’s point of view – can we seek to understand it? Can we get curious about it?

Can we ask ourselves – and maybe ask each other:

• What do you see that I don’t?

• What’s your perception of reality, and how does that shape your worldview?

• What values and fears are shaping your perspectives and decisions?

Make no mistake. We all hold an incomplete picture. We must find enough humility in ourselves to look outside ourselves – and outside of our echo chambers – to try to fill in the picture.

---

This does not mean giving up the fight for what you believe in, ceasing to stand for justice, or changing your political views.

It does mean being willing to see a more complex, nuanced picture of reality, one that allows us to step out of disdain for each other and invite a new kind of conversation.

Because the old conversation isn’t working.

Last night, I ran an errand and cried in the car (yes, about the election) while listening to the song, “One” by Sleeping at Last.

Hold on for a minute
'Cause I believe that we can fix this over time
That every imperfection is a lie
Or at least an interruption

Now hold on, let me finish
No, I'm not saying perfect exists in this life
But we'll only know for certain if we try

I, I want to sing a song worth singing
I'll write an anthem worth repeating
I, I want to feel the transformation
A melody of reformation

I'll hold it all more loosely
And yet somehow much more dearly

---

My friends and fellow citizens, may you hold it all a bit more loosely, but somehow much more dearly in the days ahead.

Further Resources:

• Read more about Polarities: here’s a shorter, simpler article and the longer, more academic one referenced above

• Braver Angels: a citizens’ organization uniting red and blue Americans in a working alliance to depolarize America

---

[1]

https://www.polaritypartnerships.com/