This story gives me hope

Do you lose hope at times that we can ever overcome the deep division in our nation? I do, but then a story like this comes out. A former Trump supporter, Danny Collins, posted a video on Tik Tok telling “why he left the Trump ‘cult’.” (See the article and link to the video here.) Collins candidly revealed how he once embraced Trump's rhetoric and policies before realizing they brought the "worst" aspects of himself to the surface.

"All of those internalized beliefs,” Collins said, “the worst of me that I used to keep suppressed, he brought to the surface. He showed me how much of a racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, woman-hating, Christian white nationalist I truly was. … And he made me believe as a white, straight Christian male, that I was under attack, that I was being discriminated against in America today. … He made me realize how horrible of a person I really was."

Every story I hear of people who began to see themselves differently and realize there is a different way to see the world gives me hope. As we speak out against this global authoritarian movement (not just one person or one group), there will be individuals like this who will change.

Speaking out may begin by calling out and confronting the movement’s narrative of fear, anger, demonizing, and violence (whether verbal or physical). That may be all we can do when we try to talk with someone because they’re not open to anything else. Challenge the story they tell – the falsehoods, deceptions, conspiracies, of course – but also challenge the worldview, the way this narrative sees the world and what it considers a “better” future.

Then begin to engage in conversation with the hope of persuading the individual that there is a different story – a different way to see the world – that makes sense. When do we move from challenging the movement to changing the story, seeking to persuade?

My way of seeing the world – my worldview – includes empathy. That’s part of the story I tell about how the world works at its best. So in my conversations with people, I stay open to the possibility that they might be ready to at least consider other options for a worldview than the one they have learned. Empathy engages with people as they are, not as I want them to be. As much as possible, I put myself in their place, seeking to understand how they see things, why they see it that way. Patience and respect combine with empathy to enable me to look for small openings to ask questions that encourage them to use different language and begin to see it differently.

Here are four things to watch for in our conversations that might indicate a new openness and a possibility of persuading someone that another story is possible.

1st – When the person is also listening – willing to hear me out as I say something they’ve been taught is wrong. If I’m not arguing, not challenging the person but the movement, listening with empathy and respect, and the other person is responding in the same way, that’s an opening.

2nd – When the person uses respectful language – not using the movement’s language of threat and intimidation – not talking about enemies to be feared and stopped – not arguing a point but talking about different views.

3rd – When the other person asks questions. Part of that is asking questions – open-ended questions that allow the other person to say more about what they mean and why they say it. When the person in this conversation is now doing that with me, that’s a sign of real progress toward persuasion.

4th – The person says “good point” – or something similar – indicating that he or she acknowledges some truth – even the smallest bit of truth – in what I’m saying.

In his recent book, The Persuaders, Anand Giridharadas says that a better term for moderates might be “persuadables” because their minds are in play. [p.220] A majority of the population can be described as moderate, politically or religiously. They are certainly not on the extremes, not even locked into just one way of seeing and experiencing the world. They see value in different aspects of both liberal and conservative, or compassionate and authoritarian perspectives.

Anat Shenker-Osorio, principal and founder of ASO Communications whose work on messaging is widely used, says that “Moderates do not hold fixed ideological positions on policy issues. If they did, they wouldn’t be persuadable, and they wouldn’t be conflicted. They would have opinions, and those opinions would be fixed in an ideology. What we see is that they are the most susceptible to toggling back and forth…capable of agreeing with conservative and progressive issues.”

Persuading the other person requires us to balance confrontation with conversation. The movement must be confronted, called out, challenged – its worldview and narrative – the stories it tells and language it uses – its use of fear and anger to motivate or control people. It does no good, though to confront and challenge the individual – the person we are talking with, perhaps family or friend. If that person is “fixed in an ideology,” as Anat Shenker-Osorio says, challenging the movement may be all we can do. If the person refuses to listen or be respectful or engage in real conversation, do as much as you can to call out the dangers and deceptions or the movement, but walk away if there is no room for anything but an escalating confrontation.

If the individual you are talking with is not fixed in the ideology of the movement – if he or she is in the broad middle, a moderate – and the person is respectful, asking questions, listening and not arguing … then shift from challenging the movement to seeking to persuade this one person that another worldview, another story of how the world can be better, is possible.

Danny Collins’ story is one example of how people can change – and that gives me hope.