David Hill

During this Christmas season, many are spending time with family and friends who they only visit during the holidays. These family gatherings sometimes fall into chaos as loved ones with varying points of view attempt to discuss the things which are important to them. Some believe that the best route to maintain familial harmony is to avoid having any conversation that may cause contention (and in some situations they may be right); however, when issues are truly important, there must be a way to talk to each other without damaging relationships. 

Following my Nov. 24, 2023, column on the growing divide within the Republican Party, some have reached out to express their disagreement. I particularly appreciate the letter written by Dona Becker. Though I disagree with the conclusions drawn by Ms. Becker, I appreciate the thoughtful way she presented her position. The ability to disagree civilly is important when engaging in political rhetoric — or any other potentially divisive conversation for that matter. 

Recently, I was directed to an interesting post focused on disagreeing better from the National Governors Association (NGA) hosted by Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R). Certainly, there are plenty of policies and political positions of these two governors I do not and cannot support; however, the call to re-learn how to disagree better resonated with me. Gov. Cox states that, “Americans need to disagree better. And by that we don’t mean that we need to be nicer to each other, although that’s helpful. We need to learn to disagree in a way that allows us to find solutions and solve problems instead of endlessly bickering … [t]hrough healthy conflict, we’re confident that we can find common ground and improve our families, our communities and our nation. Together, we can disagree better.”

The NGA’s post shares several ideas on how we can disagree better with others. For example, conducting a service project alongside those with whom we disagree or writing an article in the newspaper with someone who holds a different opinion on an important issue. Doing these activities requires us to spend time with someone else who has a different opinion from our own, and more importantly, these activities require that we talk to each other.

In addition to the ideas presented above, nga.org/disagree-better/ shares many resources on how we can disagree better at home, in our community, and politically. One link takes us to various “living room conversations” which sets up a structure for having important, difficult conversations on subjects ranging from abortion to free speech to mental health and more. 

I believe that many of us have a desire to talk with our friends and family about important issues, but realize that those conversations are complicated, especially if it is not something you do on a regular basis. For those who want to begin having these conversations, I would suggest following the format presented by livingroomconversations.org: set expectations by stating what you intend to discuss, develop common ground including learning what is important to each other, allow the other person to give their argument and do not interrupt or talk over them, ask follow-up questions to clarify your understanding, and reflect on what you have discussed. 

Having these conversations does not require that you change your perspective or adopt a different point of view, but instead engaging in this process openly and in good faith allows us to understand not only what someone else is saying, but why they are saying it. Even though we may still disagree, we can do so while maintaining respect for each other. When we have difficult conversations with the purpose of understanding each other better, we can improve relationships while also learning about alternative viewpoints.