Harmonize diverse racial views

Connect diverse racial views to diverse psychosocial needs

Steph Turner, Value Relating

OVERVIEW

1. Illuminating diverse needs behind diverse beliefs
2. Tweeting politicos to harmonize these diverse politicized needs
3. Stepping further outside polarization

Previously, I harmonized racial politics to your underlying psychosocial needs. I invite you to see how your affected psychosocial needs correlate highly with your political outlook, if you lean politically left or right. Now we delve into how much you lean in either direction. Now we unpack the diversity of such identity politics across the political spectrum.

Racism serves as the final in eight hot button issues across the spectrum. Later, I may introduce more. For now, I delve deeper into these eight issues to illuminate the diversity of views along the psychosocial spectrum discussed previously.

Left leaning racial views generally appeal to wider relationships. I see wider relationships result from unmet social-needs relative to guarded self-needs. Wider relationships tend to generalize how the public should assure social equality, while relying on their established resolved need to respect their self-identity despite pressures to acculturate to the point of losing their authenticity.

“I need others to see how various forms of identity-based discrimination still persists to deny some of us full equality. I still encounter raced-based forms of discrimination, which I find enormously unacceptable!”

Right leaning racial views generally appeal to deeper relationships. I see deeper relationships result from unmet self-needs compared to guarded social-needs. Deeper relationships tend to generalize how individuals are personally free to make responsible choices, while relying on their established resolved need for respect for others in their social circles, regardless of their innocuous differences or harmless imperfections or limits beyond their personal control.

“I need others to see how excessive use of politicized rules hinders us from giving others the respect they need. I still encounter the paternalism of impersonal government moralizing, which I find extremely unacceptable!”

1. Illuminating diverse needs behind diverse beliefs

Categories along the continuum are less about fitting into neat definitions, and more for comparing with each other. There easily can be some overlap across categories. Let’s focus more on the vulnerable needs beneath the visible expressions of racial politics.

Remember, harmony politics is not about finding harmony between the left and right. No, harmony politics supersedes the political divide by linking

outward political rhetoric

with

inward vulnerably felt needs.

Sometimes the sharpest differences are not between left and right, but between those within the left and between those within the right. You tend to expect more from those in the same camp. Your sharpest disagreements about race tend to be among those you’d expect more agreement—including those of the same race but different political outlook.

Harmony politics links you to the diverse needs in each of these camps under the big tent of each partisan wing. You are challenged here to listen for the hard-to-express needs behind the declared rhetoric. Racism tends to be too sensitive of an issue to bring up in mixed company. The most important expressions are reserved in body language, and other indirect forms.

You can disagree all you want with each declared perspective on race. But you get nowhere disputing the underlying vulnerable needs. If on the far or progressive left, you may feel easily “triggered” reading the expressed needs of those on the far right. If on the far or reactionary right, you may feel dismissive of any implication you could be harboring racist attitudes.

You can either endure such discomfort and learn about each other’s inflexible needs, to more thoroughly resolve these needs to the point of removing such pain. Or you can follow the masses of guarding your vulnerable needs behind the shield of divisive politics. While we’re solving the problem by communicating each other’s uncomfortable truth, you can always revert back to the familiarity of your grinding pain. Remember, there’s no such thing as pain apart from unresolved needs. Fully resolving a need fully removes its pain.

By the way, in each of the following “We need” statements, read that “we” as exclusive to the speaker and their “tribe.” Only read as an inclusive “we” if including your values. This time, I take you on a journey of deeper encounter for each psychosocial orientation.

STRUCTURAL AND PERVASIVE

WIDE-YET-SHALLOW - Far Left Socialist/Democratic Socialist:

It’s typically easier for the wide-yet-shallow to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

Capitalism perpetuates racism. Reject capitalism as the culprit to 
slavery and its current manifestation in economically incentivized 
mass incarceration. We demand the dismantling of private prisons and 
every form of profiteering off targeted brown and black bodies.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need to consider reparations for slavery and compensate for any other shameful capitalist legacy. We need to face the racist and other discriminatory sins of our past in order to build a better future for all.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more I see you rely on rugged individualism, the more I fear you will not recognize my need for a collective response to what I see as individually incentivized forms of racism.

But the more I take a chance you can relate to how I experience the issue of racism, and see something meaningfully done to resolve it, then maybe I’ll become less rigid in seeing racism as structural and pervasive.

SYSTEMIC AND INTERSECTIONAL

WIDE-THEN-DEEP - Social Progressive/Social Democrat:

It’s typically easier for the wide-then-deep to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

Systemic racism persists along with other forms of oppression. Reject 
oppression in all its intersectional forms. Anti-racism demands an end 
to white supremacy, by passing laws where necessary.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need others to see how systems of oppression intersect to compound trauma in our lives. We need to dismantle white supremacy and other forms of systemic oppression still traumatizing historically marginalized identities.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more I see you deny racism as systemic and intersectional, the more I fear you will never recognize how powerless I am to individually confront these subtler forms of racism like white privilege, still limiting my opportunities.

But the more I take a chance you can relate to how I experience complicated forms of racism, and see something meaningfully done to address it, then maybe I’ll become less rigid in seeing racism as systemic and intersectional.

CULTURAL COMPETENCIES

WIDE-AND-DEEP - Center Left Liberal/Moderate:

It’s typically easier for the wide-and-deep to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

More diversity training is needed. Reject hiring practices biased 
against people of color. We demand accountability for excluding 
nonwhites in hiring practices and in other social arenas.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need others to see room for improving each other’s cultural competencies when interacting with one another. We need to overcome racial and other forms of discrimination by fully including our multicultural diversity.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more I see you deny racism still persists while insisting nonwhites acculturate more into your cultural ways, the more I fear you overlook how we all benefit from one another’s cultural differences.

But the more I take a chance you can relate to what other cultures have to offer, and see you meaningfully value it, then maybe I’ll become less rigid in seeing racism as an ongoing lack of cultural competencies.

POST-RACIAL COLORBLIND

DEEP-AND-WIDE - Center Right Conservative/Moderate:

It’s typically easier for the deep-and-wide to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

Racism is no longer the problem it once was. Reject claims that racism 
exists where it does not. We demand greater personal responsibility 
instead of blaming problems on “systemic” racism that rationalizes 
dependence on government programs paid by more responsible tax payers.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need to celebrate the vast improvements in racial relationships and focus less on a past we cannot change. We need to heal together from past tragedies to build a better future for every individual.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more I hear you emphasize the race of someone stopped by the police with lethal force, the more I fear you’re projecting onto us your own racism with the full sensational weight of the media against our due process rights.

But the more I take a chance you can focus less on our past shame and more on improved race relations, and affirm we’re doing our best, then maybe I can be less rigid in insisting we’re all now post-racial colorblind.

PERSONAL YET RARE

DEEP-THEN-WIDE - New Right Reactionary/Alt-Lite:

It’s typically easier for the deep-then-wide to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

Stop characterizing all whites as racist because of the racist acts of 
a few. Reject as prejudice any suggestion these racists are exemplary 
of all whites. We demand personal responsibility from all.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need to deal with the few cases of racists acts and not exaggerate them for media sensationalism. We need to overcome identity-based discrimination by embracing each other as responsible individuals.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more I hear you accuse Trump or other Republicans as being racist, the more I fear you will insinuate the same about me, to stigmatize me and cause me to lose my source of income without due process.

But the more I take a chance you won’t accuse me of racism because of some ethnic insensitivity, and you appreciate how I prize individuality over group identity, maybe then I’ll be less rigid in viewing racism as personal yet rare.

REVERSE RACISM

DEEP-YET-NARROW - Far Right/Alt-Right:

It’s typically easier for the deep-yet-narrow to visibly argue, reject and demand of you:

Everyone in our nation deserves equal treatment without regard to race. 
Reject reverse discrimination, like affirmative action and race-based 
hiring quotas. We demand free space for everyone to embrace their racial 
heritage, including whites who increasingly face race-based disadvantages.

It can be harder to vulnerably listen to them, and affirm their take on needs, as they assert:

We need all to see how racial discrimination now applies to whites who are increasingly disadvantaged. We need to conserve our sacred traditions, like family loyalty, that make it possible for us to coexist with other ethnicities.

It can be even harder to build enough trust to offer something toward resolving the needs:

The more you disrupt our Western traditions cohering us together, the more I fear you will spur many of us further into white separatism, then into defensive white supremacy, and even into desperate acts of ethnic violence.

But the more I take a chance you’ll understand how multiculturalism threatens our waning cultural cohesion, with the opioid crisis and suicides, maybe then I’ll be less rigid in claiming we’re discriminated against by reverse racism.

2. Tweeting politicos to harmonize these diverse politicized needs

Now to tweet with more engaging language. “When you” address racism that way you to, “I feel” it’s better to get right to our diverse needs. Or something like that.

Most tweets about race understandably come from the left, but I did find one from the right. A push back to the left’s charge of racism behind voter IDs. I’m segueing into the next series, where I shift away from the typical declarative statements typical on Twitter, to transition into a more inviting dialogue.

ENGAGING THE LEFT

ENGAGING THE RIGHT

LANGUAGE OF ENGAGEMENT

Couples argue all the time. They defensively reject each other’s arguments. They demand concessions of each other. In short, they seek shortcuts to their lack of effective communication. Their relationship inevitably suffers.

America—or any other nation, for that matter—is much like that quarrelsome couple. All the fighting, shouting and arm-twisting fuels a struggle to identify unresolved needs affected by each other. Divisive politics gives you a shortcut to effectively conveying your needs to each other. Everyone suffers for it.

Maturing couples find better ways to communicate their identified needs. “When you forget to lock the door behind you,” she tells her spouse, “I dread coming home to find the house broken into.” Likewise, “When you support the removal of all affirmative action programs,” the liberal academic confesses to his conservative colleague, “I fear my kids will never have the opportunities I’ve had.” No blame. No hostilities. No accusations.

Consider this the language of engagement. Instead of putting others on the defense, you invite them to relate to your affected needs as you experience them. You in kind relate to their needs as they experience them. No point in disagreeing, since needs do not cater to our arguments.

LANGUAGE OF ENCOUNTER

Relationships mature when promptly expressing affected needs. Demanding what you want invites familiar disappointment. First, let’s give these identified needs some oxygen. “I can remember to lock the door by adding an alarm on my phone.” Likewise, “It’s easier for me to serve as a reference for your daughter than give more ground to stifling government mandates.”

Consider this the language of encounter. Instead of rejecting or accepting arguments, you acknowledge how positions impact your inflexible needs. No name calling. No epithets. No dismissiveness.

LANGUAGE OF ENACTMENT

Individuals, and the relationships they’re in, can thrive more freely when addressing these impacted needs. Divisive politics favors dysfunctional pain relief over fully resolving needs on both sides. Harmony Politics prioritizes removal of pain by resolving the needs causing the pain.

Consider this the language of enactment. Instead of demanding what others should do for me, I invite others to tell me what I can do for them. No compromising principles. No deferring hope. No inaction.

ACCOUNTABILITY BEYOND THE BALLOT BOX

The next series delves into this deepening engagement. Democracy finds it potential in resolving needs, not merely easing the pain of these unresolved needs.

Racism will never end if the needs across the political spectrum—and range of psychosocial orientations—are not fully resolved. Debating over these issues is mostly fake, since it rarely gets to the heart of the matter.

Racism persists where the unresolved needs of the deep-oriented for deeper and tighter relationships is frustrated by pressures for wider and shallower relations. Racism persists where the unresolved needs of the wide-oriented for wider and more inclusive relationship is frustrated by pressures for deeper and tighter relations.

It’s time to critique such divisive politics as complicit with dysfunction. Stay tuned. After the next series analyzing the ups and downs of each of these eight positions, I start using Harmony Politics to critique political leaders and media pundits. And I welcome you to get on board, as a grassroots movement to keep political elites accountable to the needs they ostensibly serve. One loving engagement at a time.

3. Stepping further outside polarization

This article on race serves as the second in the second series of issue-oriented articles. Let’s harmonize our politics to our diverse needs, to replace bitter divisive politics with greater respect and love for one another. One issue at a time.

Follow each issue here. Links for articles yet to be published will understandably not work yet.

1 Harmonize your immigration politics. Harmonize diverse immigration views.

2 Harmonize your climate change politics. Harmonize diverse climate change views.

3 Harmonize your gun safety politics. Harmonize diverse gun safety views.

4 Harmonize your abortion politics. Harmonize diverse abortion views.

5 Harmonize your healthcare politics. Harmonize diverse healthcare views.

6 Harmonize your criminal justice politics. Harmonize diverse criminal justice views.

7 Harmonize your economy politics. Harmonize diverse economy views.

8 Harmonize your racial politics. Harmonize diverse racial views.

HARMONY POLITICS AND YOU

Consider how Harmony Politics could serve your needs. I consult with political leaders and influencers to link them with the vulnerable needs of their audience. Contact me to explore how I can fit this pioneering approach to your particular need to stand out more.

I cover much of this material in more detail in my eCourse Defusing Polarization: Understanding Divisive Politics. Check out the free units to see if it serves your needs. Share the link with others you know in need of this fresh understanding of politics.

Together, let’s revolutionize politics with love. If we don’t, who will?

SHARE THE WEALTH

If you find this article valuable, please click "like" and share freely. Follow here on LinkedIn to keep up with these daily encouragements to turn divisive politics into opportunities to love one another across the political divide. Spread that love, and let some of this love return back to you.

Don't forget to comment below. Thank you for helping turn politics as usual into greater respect for your specific needs, and theirs.