Skip to main content

Natural Awakenings Atlanta

The Divide May Not Be As Wide As We Think

Oct 01, 2024 06:00AM ● By Paul Chen

On the day I learned that we would interview Indian spiritual master Gurudev Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, founder of the Art of Living Foundation, Thomas Matthew Crooks attempted to assassinate Donald Trump. Thus, the most important question I imagined asking Gurudev was what Americans can do to overcome the destructive and depressing division among family and friends.

I ended up not asking the question, and the reason was surprisingly positive: The division I assumed existed in this country is—perhaps—nowhere near as bad as many of us tend to believe. I searched for surveys on the topic and discovered some pretty interesting facts.

In a September 2021 article on the American Enterprise Institute’s website, Samuel Abrams wrote about results from the American National Election Study, which asked: “In the past four years, how much have political differences hurt your relationships with family members?”

“Not even 3% of Americans responded that their familial relationship were hurt ‘a great deal’ by political differences, and only 3% stated they were hurt ‘a lot.’” And, overall, “85% of Americans said that political differences within their families did not hurt their relationships.” When it comes to friends, the number goes up. Another 2021 study from the Survey Center on American Life found that 15% of respondents have ended a friendship because of politics.

I don’t know about you, but I was surprised by how low these numbers were; I expected that at least a third would say political differences have hurt familial relationships and friendships.

So it seems the American people are much better about maintaining ties than the news and social media worlds might have us believe. And, strengthening the message of this letter even further, I woke up this morning to a Washington Post opinion piece entitled “How the Psychology of Political Division Could Lead Us Out of It.”

Jami Zaki, a professor of psychology at Stanford, and Luiza Santos, a psychology PhD graduate from Stanford, conducted a study with “more than 160 Americans who spoke about their opposing political views … Over and over, we observed as participants with rival opinions came to these conversations ready for combat—and left feeling changed. Afterward, they reported feeling less hostile toward the other party and more humble in their own views. When asked to rate the pleasantness of these dialogues, the most common response was 100 on a 100-point scale.”

The authors talked about how the project’s participants were, like me, surprised. “The Americans we surveyed believed that conversations like the one between Ben and Emily (two of the participants) would be a waste of time, or even counterproductive … Ben and Emily were similarly pessimistic—and thus shocked by how much they enjoyed one another and learned from their time together. The sad irony is that even when our pessimism is misplaced, it creates cycles of silence and misunderstanding that worsen division.”

I have always believed that “we have so much more in common than what separates us,” as one of the current presidential candidates has said. I also believe that most Americans are tired of being divided and angry all the time. The authors found that to be true in a separate study. In Belief in the Utility of Cross-Partisan Empathy Reduces Partisan Animosity and Facilitates Political Persuasion, they write: “80% of Americans regret the country’s division and wish for greater cooperation.” And they found the first to be true in their experiment. “Americans of each party hold breathtakingly warped impressions of the other side. In our study, we asked Republican and Democratic voters how much they supported antidemocratic practices … Most people on each side support fair and free democracy but don’t realize their rivals do as well: Participants estimated that the other side was nearly twice as antidemocratic as they really are.”

They close on a note of hope. “Research offers hints about how to make these conversations productive. Good disagreers don’t hide their own perspective, but they also express genuine curiosity about others’ views and point out common ground when they see it. They share personal stories and ask about each other’s experiences. This type of exchange isn’t just nice—it’s powerful.”

For the last several weeks, I’ve contemplated reaching out to an old friend to talk about our diametrically opposed views. I’ve been very hesitant to do so out of the fear that it would be counterproductive. Reading the article this morning—and writing this letter—have been encouraging. Above and beyond my sense of responsibility to walk the talk, I feel I need to do my share of righting this ship.

America’s healing cannot come soon enough. 

How To Make a Difference 

The perfect companion to this letter is Clarice Belcher’s contribution in this issue on nonviolent communications. 

I took Clarice’s free workshop on Marshall Rosenberg’s groundbreaking work years ago. I was impressed by the material, feeling that everyone needs to be exposed to it; sadly, in America, we’re far more concerned about IQ than EQ. I partcipated in one of her practice groups and we all experienced the effective ness of the practice. Hardly a session went by when one or more participants were moved to tears by their own realization, or by shar ing in the realization of another. 

If you wish for more intimate relationships, or want a more caring society, consider taking the course offered by his diminui tive elder whose one-woman campaign to make the world a better place is a true light shining in these seemingly dark times. ❧


Publisher of Natural Awakenings Atlanta since 2017, Paul Chen’s professional background includes strategic planning, marketing management and qualitative research. He practices Mahayana Buddhism and kriya yoga. Contact him at [email protected].
Mailing List

Subscribe To Our Newsletter!

* indicates required