Confusion: Part One

      I remember the presidential election of 2000, when George W Bush ran against Al Gore.  And Ralph Nader.  The outcome is history.  It is a topic that I have rarely heard discussed without bitterness--even before this most recent election.  But even that controversial event didn't inspire as much protest, debate, & concern as those of November 2016.  More than anything else, however, the election of Donald Trump seems to have invoked confusion.  A lot of confusion.  Confusion should inspire curiosity, but it's much more likely to inspire anxiety, often to the point of fear.  And fear makes a dangerous motivator.

      So I'm trying to be methodical.  I'm making a list of the things that confuse me these days, & I'm making an effort to seek information.  Some questions (like WTF is up with the electoral college? and Just how easy would it be for Trump to fire nukes?) are fairly easy to answer with a little research.  Others delve deep into human nature, which has officially become more difficult to predict than the weather.  And to accomplish this, communication is necessary.
      It's also one of the most confusing things at the moment.
      Since Trump took office, I have heard a lot of people talking about how perplexed they become when trying to converse with individuals who voted for the other presidential candidate.  We want to persuade others to our way of thinking.  This goes both ways: I was bemused by this article in the Seattle Times last week outlining how local Trump supporters were confused by all the protests going on.  Being a liberal myself, I more often hear many like-minded individuals voicing confusion about friends or family members who didn't share their voting strategy.  These conversions often end with a stab at optimism: "Well, those Trump voters will realize their mistake soon enough, when nothing works out the way they want!"
      Unfortunately, I'm not so sure.  There was an excellent article in Slate magazine** that summarized the challenges when trying to communicate with "true believers."  Whatever their Cause - medical miracle, religious figurehead, new political philosophy* - when a person becomes convinced that Cause is Good, they can defend that position to a frightening degree.  As a psychotherapist I have often wished that I better understood this phenomenon.  (Minority groups have been familiar with this problem for years: just try being a person of color persuading a privileged white person that White Privilege is a thing.)  Now more than ever, I wish I had some great insight--because a lot of conversations need to happen over the next 3 years, 11 months, & some-odd days.
      If you have other experiences, resources, or ideas about constructive communication, I very much want to hear it.  I think this skill may prove the most critical resource in our joint futures.  In fact, I believe it may save lives.

*We this historically with political revolutions: think the early years of the Soviet Union, or North Korea.  If you want a better understanding, I cannot over-recommend the book "Nothing To Envy" by Barbara Demick.  It is one of the most interesting, most engrossing, & most eye-opening books I've ever read.

**Ok, if you follow only one link in this whole blog post, THIS IS THE ONE TO READ!!!