How A Few Simple Ground Rules Can Help Polarized Groups Hold Civil Conversations With Each Other

In our country we are having great difficult talking with those who are on the other side of an issue, whether that issue is about politics, climate change, abortion, race or policing. We don’t have difficulty talking about the other side, it is talking to the other side that causes us problems.

There are a few simple ground rules that prevent such conversations from becoming acrimonious. The ground rules are not new, in fact, they have been around a long time.

The oldest set of ground rules I am aware of came from the Public Conversations Project that started in 1989. The staff of the Public Conversations Project believed a healthier civic life was possible—one in which people could speak truthfully and compassionately without letting their differences tear their communities apart. The ideas for the guidelines were borrowed from family therapy practices. Understandably the initial pilot dialogues were focused on abortion. In 2010 the Public Conversations Projects became “Essential Partners” and broadened their scope to facilitate a wide range of issues with communities around the globe.

Ground Rules for The Public Conversations Project (now Essential Partners):

• Respect time limits and share speaking time;
• Speak for yourself (not on behalf of or in defense of a whole group) and let others do the same;
• Speak thoughtfully, holding back the urge to criticize and persuade;
• Keep listening even when it’s hard, and don’t interrupt others;
• Hold back from debating or trying to persuade;
• Notice the assumptions you are making and ask genuine questions to find out whether they’re accurate;
• Honor the confidentiality requested by others (usually this means not revealing what particular people have said within the dialogue without permission);
• Allow people to “pass” (not speak) without having to explain.

The group I do volunteer work for, is Braver Angels (formerly Better Angels). This national non-profit was formed in 2016 to reduce with the political polarization in the US. Braver Angels holds workshops across the United States that bring together Reds and Blues to understand, not change, the other side. Across the country over a thousand workshops have been held.  Here are the Ground Rules for Braver Angels, which are remarkably similar to Essential Partner’s list.

Braver Angels:

• We’re here to understand others and to explain our views, not to convince anyone to change their mind.
• Let’s each speak for ourselves and not try to speak for or represent any outside
  group.
• Let’s stick to the spirit of the activities designed for each stage of the meeting. Example: if the topic is what we each learned from listening to others, that’s all we do then even if it means resisting the urge to explain our own political view point.
• Otherwise, it’s standard stuff we all know: taking turns, not interrupting others, listen to everyone and opening space for quieter group members, being respectful (as in no eye rolling or loud sighs when someone is speaking) etc. In other words, bringing our best selves to a difficult conversation.
• Enforcing the ground rules: Do the facilitators have permission to gently help people make course corrections when they inadvertently veer off one of these ground rules?

There are, in fact, now quite a number of organizations that are working toward similar goals and that have remarkably similar guidelines. In her book “Overcoming Polarization in the Public Square” Lauren Barthold names some of these, Ben Franklin Circles, Colossian Forum, Heterodox Academy, Living Room Conversations, Open Minds Platform, Story Corps, and the Zeidler Center for Public Discussion. And summarizes their ground rules which are, again, similar to the two lists above:

In order to have a constructive conversation where people speak thoughtfully and listen respectively, we will:

• Speak for ourselves and from our own point of view, and experiences, using “I” (not we or “they”).
• Listen to understand and speak to be understood – not to persuade others.
• Speak one at a time and not interrupt.
• Share air time and make sure everyone’s had a chance to speak once before speaking a second time.
• Listen with curiosity and resilience.
• Feel free to “pass”/“pass for now” if we are not ready or do not wish to respond.
• Respect confidentiality: what’s said in this space stays in this space.

I have been pondering why such simple guidelines work. None of these organizations suggest that participants need extensive training to talk in a civil manner to each other - the guidelines themselves seem sufficient. The conclusions I’ve come to are that the guidelines work because:

1. they are simple, not difficult to understand or with ambiguous terms
2. they are few in number, 8-10 usually, so possible to keep in mind
3. meetings are facilitated, and the facilitator is neutral
4. the ground rules are phrased not as “you will” but as “we will,” signifying an agreement between both sides that they will abide by the rules in the interest of having a civil conversation
5. the facilitator asks for and receives permission from the group members to gently remind them if they forget or get carried away (in my experience as a moderator, catching the first instance of rule breaking, helps everyone remember for the rest of the meeting)
6. we all have a deep desire to heal the divide among us and are grateful for ground rules that make conversation possible

What following such ground rules does, is begin to humanize the other side. Participants learn that the other side has reasons for their positions, that it is not that they are just stupid, unfeeling or out of touch.

Clearly such simple ground rules do not resolve the issues between polarized groups. But it does create the empathy and respect for others, that then allows people to think together in more substantive conversations. But a more substantive conversation is not possible without first having a conversation that lays the foundation of respect and empathy for the other side.