What to Listen to…Mind Chatter or Your Voice of Wisdom? (Or Sorely Needed: Courageous Conversations)

Some will call me terminally naive. I prefer visionary and practical. I’m uninterested in intellectual ruminations without practical application. I should explain. I am originally from Germany. Enough said.

Now then, what if we were courageous enough to stick our neck out for the public good rather than sit in quiet desperation at the side lines? In the recent tragedy of Sergeant Bales and the seventee
Afghans he murdered, I ask myself “What if the deployment policy makers, the implementers, the deployed, the legislators, and conce
ed citizen like us, would all commit to a courageous conversation about redeploying for the third or fourth time men and women who have already been pushed beyond their breaking point? This travesty was a disaster waiting to happen, and people knew it. But rather than talking about it, people rationalized, justified, just plain closed their eyes to the reality. No courageous public conversation could take place. The conditions for having such a conversation were not present. It was akin to all the parties sitting in a leaky boat pointing to the hole and saying “I’m glad that hole isn’t on our side of the boat.”

It’s not our problem? Come on. Who are we kidding? What happened to our social contract that we have allowed it to be all right to send one percent of the population to bear the brunt of the wars we fight? If we were skilled to have courageous conversations in smaller contexts than in the arena of the industrial-military complex, we might never let so many things get out of control which we could have handled when they were much smaller.

As discussed in previous posts, courageous conversations interrogate our reality. They tackle the tough stuff. We tell the truth, rather than tell ourselves lies so we can look good. Do we really want to be nice guys at any cost?

Let’s ask this simple question: “What AREN’T we publicly talking about—individually and collectively? We’re not talking about our infinite capacity to deceive ourselves through rationalization and justification so that we can continue to look into the mirror without throwing up. We aren’t talking about the taboo of using our good judgment to keep a soldier from a third or even fourth deployment. We aren’t talking about our mind chatter that whispers “We can’t make a difference. “

Mind chatter matters.

No matter how hard we try to look good, our behaviors are always a reflection of the values that spawn them. And the values spawning our representatives’ behaviors here come from mind chatter and not our voice of wisdom which so many of us don’t know how to access despite the fact that we all have a voice of wisdom. Among the values derived from self-limiting mind chatter is this one: “The end justifies the means.” And this one:”We don’t have enough (manpower, resources, fill in the blank), so we gotta squeeze every bit of juice out of what we DO have, no matter the consequences.” What will produce a shift? I believe courageous conversations can shift mind-sets which will shift behaviors, which can shift entrenched cultural norms…including the norm to assume the average citizen can’t do anything.
Courageous conversations have a good chance of accessing our voice of wisdom.

If we were to commit to courageous conversations so that we could be more skilled in averting disasters like Sergeant Bale’s meltdown and its consequences, we would invite, even provoke learning, the third characteristic of a courageous conversation. Courageous conversations do require some skills. For example, we need to be able to engage in what might be called constructive conflict. Constructive conflict could be defined as: When those involved in a difference recognize the differences and are willing and able to balance advocating their own position with inquiring into the position of the other, looking for a win/win.

Congress, have you heard of constructive conflict? Or are you listening to mind chatter? Mind chatter matters.

In constructive conflict people trust that the parties to the conflict want to work it out. It’s not enemy-centered. People create an environment where everyone listens as well as represents their point of view. A collaborative spirit persists as people look to serve mutual needs. When there are disagreements they are about the issues, not the personalities of the players.

Have you ever been punished for disagreeing with your boss? If so, your boss didn’t make that distinction. Can you see how this applies to many areas of life? Would it be all right with you if so called difficult conversations were easier?

The example of a constructive conflict sounds like a courageous conversation would be a natural by- product. Do you agree? Of course they are as rare in the public domain as ice on a beach on the island of Hawaii. No wonder Congressional approval is in the basement. But let’s not point to the hole in the boat saying “I’m glad it’s not on our side.” What courageous conversation aren’t WE having?

We know that the fourth characteristic of a courageous conversation is that it enriches relationships. One effect of constructive conflict is that it promotes positive energy and commitment to mutual goals. It also promotes good decisions that get implemented. Would that enrich relationships?

It should be becoming clear that courageous conversations come from the best in us…the best, which in Sergeant Bales, was swept away with each ignored SOS. Courageous conversations nourish our spirits, so that we muster the energy to fix the leaky boat together, get to shore, and proceed on the high road in the direction of our goals.

If you’re saying right now, “Dream on, Ingrid,” it’s a reflection of our cynicism in the face of such enormous odds. However, if it’s possible to have courageous conversations at home and at work, it’s possible to have them in larger context. Why not take the invitation we hear so frequently today? Let’s be the change we want to see.