The Blogs: Thought for the Three Weeks: How to Disagree Agreeably

There are serious divisions in the United States, in Israel, and in Europe. In the U.S., it’s so far been the craziest election since 1968. Israel is roiled by protests from multiple corners of society. And the three weeks between the 17^th of Tammuz and the 9^th of Av have just begun, reminding all Jews that the Temple was destroyed because of baseless hatred. Infighting among Jews was fatal.

All these events highlight the need to disagree agreeably. We have forgotten how to debate vigorously and effectively while maintaining relationships. We need to relearn this vital skill. Unity, which is part of “community,” does not require uniformity; it demands the respectful — even when passionate — exchange of ideas.

So while many politicians pay lip service to the concepts of unity, “lowering the temperature,” and “serving all,” they continue to sow divisiveness. Instead of exchanging ideas, they attack individuals or groups.

Can ordinary citizens behave differently and set an example for our leaders?

Yes.

Immediately after Oct. 7 Israeli citizens led their leaders. Israelis didn’t stop disagreeing, but they united to help the devasted communities of the South. They volunteered to support the brave IDF soldiers by doing laundry, providing food, and volunteering in many ways large and small. The solidarity in Israel that immediately followed Oct. 7 marked an extraordinary and impressive turnaround from the discord and dysfunction that marked most of 2023.

Whether in the U.S., Israel, or elsewhere, citizens in democratic countries will continue to disagree, and they need to do so without ripping apart their societies and vilifying those who have other opinions.

What are some ways to nurture unity without conformity? How can we air differing views while acknowledging and protecting our commonality? Our humanity?

Here are ten suggestions:

Listen to what the other person is saying before responding.
Find something positive to say about your opponent or their position. Say it first. Then persuasively present your view using logical analysis and data.
When critique is appropriate, criticize a policy, practice, or outcome. Not people.
Put forth solutions to problems, a vision for the future. Don’t merely criticize what is, was, or went wrong.
Leave unsupported assertions on the playground. Ludicrous claims about who is the best, who is the worst, and similar hyperbole are simply childish name-calling. The speaker is not presenting a persuasive case. As adults, let’s refrain from infantile invective.
Eliminate words such as “always” and “never.” Sentences like “They always do XYZ” or “They never do ABC” are rarely true, discourage meaningful communication, and diminish your credibility.
Use facts.
Don’t dehumanize or demonize.
Forgo inflammatory language. Overblown rhetoric grabs attention, incites crowds, and gets reactions on social media, but also destroys dialogue.
Finally in one-on-one conversations, if you can’t preserve a relationship when discussing a topic, discuss something else. Family, food, and the weather may be safe alternatives.

Social media, strong opinions, and a society in flux conspire to make civilized discourse and debate a rarity. We must bring it back to preserve democracies, preserve unity, and preserve community. Let’s move beyond echo chambers and past clashes to civilized conversations and gracious argumentation.

You and I can start. Leaders, are you listening?