I don’t take your words Merely as words. Far from it.
I listen To what makes you talk— Whatever that is— And me listen.
By Shinkichi Takahashi. Translated from the Japanese by Lucien Stryk & Takahashi Ikemoto.
On the morning when it became clear that Donald Trump had won the US presidential election, I was in a Zoom call with some activist friends. Most of us expressed feelings of dismay, shock, and fear, and spoke of heavy-heartedness and grief. Then someone shared a post by Rebecca Solnit, that started with the line: “They want you to feel powerless and to surrender and to let them trample everything and you are not going to let them.” The text went on: “Now good friends and good principles are worth gathering in. Remember what you love. Remember what loves you. Remember in this tide of hate what love is.” And at the end of the shared quote: “They appear to be deeply damaged people and they have come to damage everything else. . . . The rest of us and the rest of the world will be the cleanup crew because men like this never clean up after themselves.”
Much as I admire Rebecca and enjoyed some aspects of her piece, I was saddened and taken aback by this “them and us” polemic, the generalization and judgement. Can we not “gather good principles” that help us to sustain strength without taking recourse to the very polarization that is becoming so pervasive in our societies? I want to make a case for walking our talk, as we find our allies and our calling, staying sensitively attuned to ourselves and others, including those who voted differently from us and the people they voted for. Let’s offer at least those closest to us a respite from unhelpful commiseration and polarization, and instead honor the lifeblood of our feelings and the connective power of needs and values.
I have found the principles and application of mindful, empathetic listening, inspired by NVC (Nonviolent Communication) a confidence-inspiring framework. The principles are easy to understand, though it needs some practice to move from a somewhat schematised application into free-flowing and natural expression. I have outlined the four essential steps of Observations, Feelings, Needs, and Requests in my June article “Connecting from the Wise and Compassionate Heart.” In this article, I am going to present modes of communication to avoid—whether in a post-election or any other context—before offering some examples of how we can home in on feelings and needs as we empathize with another person.
There are a number of somewhat disconnecting patterns of communicating we are quite used to—they are often on the tip of our tongue. On the face of it, there is “nothing wrong” with them—but they keep us on the surface. They don’t lead to people feeling fully heard and understood. When we brought in touch with our feelings and needs, any subsequent strategies and actions have more of a chance to actually work, because more of our energy is behind them. I found it very helpful to identify these patterns when they arise as an urge to say something—to pause and use my mindfulness skills to bring more choice into the matter.
So let’s imagine that you are in dialogue with a US citizen who is deeply troubled by the impending Trump administration. He says:
“Trump is likely to behave like a dictator, with few legal powers to keep him in check. He will take revenge wherever he can against those he feels have slighted him. I’m most concerned about the ‘unleashing’ of hate speech from far right-wing people—men telling women and girls that it’s ‘her body, his choice’ or threats toward LGBTQ+ folks. Then there are the Trump administration’s direct actions to harm and threaten immigrants and refugees here. They live in an atmosphere of threat and fear. Our nation’s image as welcoming and protective, already damaged in many ways, might be utterly shattered. I also feel despondent that so many Americans have voted for a man who is so obviously morally corrupt and short-sighted. His blatant disregard for environmental protection is very concerning. I have deep fears about the future of our country—it’s so polarized.”
Reassuring: Oh well, it may not turn out so bad after all, and he will be in power for just four years—that time will pass in a flash.
If the other person’s fears have not been first acknowledged, this may come across as glib and may say more about the unprocessed fears of the person offering such consolation.
Storytelling: You know, in the UK Brexit was such a divisive subject, and it’s certainly now clear to the majority that it was a big mistake. Our economy is far from what was promised, shipping anything abroad is a bureaucratic nightmare, etc. . . .
This is taking the focus away from the original story, and while it may create some sense of comfort in connection (“maybe she knows from her own experience what it’s like”), it is ultimately frustrating for the first speaker not to be heard in their own right.
One-Upping: Just as were waiting for the US election results, we heard that the German government coalition had broken down. Or: We have a Latino friend who is an illegal immigrant and he is absolutely horrified by the prospect of deportation.
This is very common—one issue follows the next, spiraling into a strangely compelling terrain of doom and gloom. “Othering” is often a component of it. The conversation stays on a level of commiseration, without much empathy or awareness. As with all of these modes, they serve some needs and it is interesting to consider what it may be in this case: comradeship?
Educating: I recently read that American voters are less ideologically polarized than they think they are, and that misperception is greatest for the most politically engaged people.
Again, this can be perceived as downplaying the experience of the speaker and is unlikely to be perceived as helpful. There may be a place for such information later on in a conversation, after establishing that there is receptivity for a different view.
Judging: I think you are giving in to catastrophizing. After all these years of meditation you should know better than believing your thoughts.
Nobody likes to hear “shoulds.”
Advising: If I were you, I would study the stages of grief by Kubler-Ross. That would help to understand your emotional upheaval and cope with it better. I would also recommend to listen to the news less, meditate more, and do some volunteering. Oh, and drink more water!
Again, there may be a place for such advice, but how much more satisfying if any coping strategies were to emerge from the person themselves, after being given the chance to fully air their feelings and values.
What many of these communication patterns have in common is a lack of openness to really take in lived experience of the speaker. They are self-referential, mainly concerned with one’s own needs, experience, and contribution. They are oriented toward solutions, toward fixing things. Rather than judging ourselves for acting like this however, it is helpful to discover which of our own needs are behind those patterns. Self-empathy is often the first step, before we can then direct our curiosity toward what really matters to the person. A truly empathetic response may have some of the following elements, inspired by Oren Jay Sofer’s book Say what you mean: A Mindful Approach to Nonviolent Communication (Shambhala 2018):
1. Silent Empathizing: with care, curiosity, and attuned to emergence
2. Mirroring Back
3. Empathizing with strong feelings, if that’s where the energy is
4. Empathize with needs: what matters most?
So here is what empathetic, NVC-informed responses may sound like, and I would like to stress that they appear here in a condensed, slightly formulaic form. In real time, they would be expressed more softly, gradually, and colloquially, in response to how the communication unfolds in a mutual exploration.
It sounds like you are really concerned about the atmosphere of hate and violence that is spreading in the country since the election? Are you feeling scared and longing to live in a country where people can feel safe and respected?
When you think about the threat to immigrants, do you feel compassion for them and deep regret that they can’t feel safe and welcome in this country?
We were talking about Trump’s plans for more oil drilling—I guess you may be feeling despondent? I know you so much value a long-term perspective of taking care of planetary health. Is that right?
You have fears about the legal system supporting Trump, so he may be able to get away with criminal activities. Is that about fairness and justice, or what is it that you want to safeguard?
Considering the uncertainty in all these areas of life that may be affected by the Trump presidency, with so many of our needs and values under jeopardy, I wonder whether there is a need to grieve?
What I want to highlight is the power of empathizing with feelings and needs. In this case, the feelings are on the darker side because the needs haven’t been met. But, as you will have noticed, the words for these needs or values are always positive: safety, respect, perspective, justice, and so on. This creates an ambience of openness, acceptance, and relaxation, within which new perspectives and strategies can flower. Apart from any resulting solutions, however, such communication is worthwhile in its own right—celebration of awareness and loving connection.
“Words”
I don’t take your words Merely as words. Far from it.
I listen To what makes you talk – Whatever that is- And me listen.
By Shinkichi Takahashi. Translated from the Japanese by Lucien Stryk & Takahashi Ikemoto.
Ratnadevi is a mindfulness teacher, trainer and retreat leader based in Scotland. She is the author of Bringing Mindfulness to Life. As a qualified coach she offers a range of one-to-one services, including online mindfulness teaching, mentoring and supervising. She is a member of the Triratna Buddhist Order and wrote an arts-based PhD thesis looking at the place of ritual for Buddhists practicing in the modern world.
Bringing Mindfulness to Life is published monthly.
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
FEATURES
Post-Election Conversations: Embodying Curiosity and Empathy, Resisting Polarization
On the morning when it became clear that Donald Trump had won the US presidential election, I was in a Zoom call with some activist friends. Most of us expressed feelings of dismay, shock, and fear, and spoke of heavy-heartedness and grief. Then someone shared a post by Rebecca Solnit, that started with the line: “They want you to feel powerless and to surrender and to let them trample everything and you are not going to let them.” The text went on: “Now good friends and good principles are worth gathering in. Remember what you love. Remember what loves you. Remember in this tide of hate what love is.” And at the end of the shared quote: “They appear to be deeply damaged people and they have come to damage everything else. . . . The rest of us and the rest of the world will be the cleanup crew because men like this never clean up after themselves.”
Much as I admire Rebecca and enjoyed some aspects of her piece, I was saddened and taken aback by this “them and us” polemic, the generalization and judgement. Can we not “gather good principles” that help us to sustain strength without taking recourse to the very polarization that is becoming so pervasive in our societies? I want to make a case for walking our talk, as we find our allies and our calling, staying sensitively attuned to ourselves and others, including those who voted differently from us and the people they voted for. Let’s offer at least those closest to us a respite from unhelpful commiseration and polarization, and instead honor the lifeblood of our feelings and the connective power of needs and values.
I have found the principles and application of mindful, empathetic listening, inspired by NVC (Nonviolent Communication) a confidence-inspiring framework. The principles are easy to understand, though it needs some practice to move from a somewhat schematised application into free-flowing and natural expression. I have outlined the four essential steps of Observations, Feelings, Needs, and Requests in my June article “Connecting from the Wise and Compassionate Heart.” In this article, I am going to present modes of communication to avoid—whether in a post-election or any other context—before offering some examples of how we can home in on feelings and needs as we empathize with another person.
There are a number of somewhat disconnecting patterns of communicating we are quite used to—they are often on the tip of our tongue. On the face of it, there is “nothing wrong” with them—but they keep us on the surface. They don’t lead to people feeling fully heard and understood. When we brought in touch with our feelings and needs, any subsequent strategies and actions have more of a chance to actually work, because more of our energy is behind them. I found it very helpful to identify these patterns when they arise as an urge to say something—to pause and use my mindfulness skills to bring more choice into the matter.
So let’s imagine that you are in dialogue with a US citizen who is deeply troubled by the impending Trump administration. He says:
Reassuring: Oh well, it may not turn out so bad after all, and he will be in power for just four years—that time will pass in a flash.
If the other person’s fears have not been first acknowledged, this may come across as glib and may say more about the unprocessed fears of the person offering such consolation.
Storytelling: You know, in the UK Brexit was such a divisive subject, and it’s certainly now clear to the majority that it was a big mistake. Our economy is far from what was promised, shipping anything abroad is a bureaucratic nightmare, etc. . . .
This is taking the focus away from the original story, and while it may create some sense of comfort in connection (“maybe she knows from her own experience what it’s like”), it is ultimately frustrating for the first speaker not to be heard in their own right.
One-Upping: Just as were waiting for the US election results, we heard that the German government coalition had broken down. Or: We have a Latino friend who is an illegal immigrant and he is absolutely horrified by the prospect of deportation.
This is very common—one issue follows the next, spiraling into a strangely compelling terrain of doom and gloom. “Othering” is often a component of it. The conversation stays on a level of commiseration, without much empathy or awareness. As with all of these modes, they serve some needs and it is interesting to consider what it may be in this case: comradeship?
Educating: I recently read that American voters are less ideologically polarized than they think they are, and that misperception is greatest for the most politically engaged people.
Again, this can be perceived as downplaying the experience of the speaker and is unlikely to be perceived as helpful. There may be a place for such information later on in a conversation, after establishing that there is receptivity for a different view.
Judging: I think you are giving in to catastrophizing. After all these years of meditation you should know better than believing your thoughts.
Nobody likes to hear “shoulds.”
Advising: If I were you, I would study the stages of grief by Kubler-Ross. That would help to understand your emotional upheaval and cope with it better. I would also recommend to listen to the news less, meditate more, and do some volunteering. Oh, and drink more water!
Again, there may be a place for such advice, but how much more satisfying if any coping strategies were to emerge from the person themselves, after being given the chance to fully air their feelings and values.
What many of these communication patterns have in common is a lack of openness to really take in lived experience of the speaker. They are self-referential, mainly concerned with one’s own needs, experience, and contribution. They are oriented toward solutions, toward fixing things. Rather than judging ourselves for acting like this however, it is helpful to discover which of our own needs are behind those patterns. Self-empathy is often the first step, before we can then direct our curiosity toward what really matters to the person. A truly empathetic response may have some of the following elements, inspired by Oren Jay Sofer’s book Say what you mean: A Mindful Approach to Nonviolent Communication (Shambhala 2018):
So here is what empathetic, NVC-informed responses may sound like, and I would like to stress that they appear here in a condensed, slightly formulaic form. In real time, they would be expressed more softly, gradually, and colloquially, in response to how the communication unfolds in a mutual exploration.
What I want to highlight is the power of empathizing with feelings and needs. In this case, the feelings are on the darker side because the needs haven’t been met. But, as you will have noticed, the words for these needs or values are always positive: safety, respect, perspective, justice, and so on. This creates an ambience of openness, acceptance, and relaxation, within which new perspectives and strategies can flower. Apart from any resulting solutions, however, such communication is worthwhile in its own right—celebration of awareness and loving connection.
Related features from BDG
Buddhistdoor View: The 2024 US Election – Politics, Power, and Compassion
“Us Versus Them:” Buddhist Perspectives on Navigating Disagreement and Division
The Art of Interrupting
The Koan of Gaza: Not Turning Away
Ven. Pomnyun Sunim: Buddhism in a Divided World
Buddhistdoor View: Refining Skillful Communication and Reclaiming the Power of Language
More from Bringing Mindfulness to Life by Ratnadevi
Ratnadevi
All Authors >>
Related features from Buddhistdoor Global
Deerpark in India
Master Shandao’s Exegesis on the Deep Mind: Faith Established in Context of Practice, Part Two
Buddhistdoor View: Are We Mainstreaming Buddhist Meditation, Again?
Buddhistdoor View: The Purpose of Learning
Virtues Versus Values: Transforming and Channelling Anger and the Passions
Related news from Buddhistdoor Global
Dalma Open International Snowboarding Competition Founded by Korean Buddhist Monk Enters its 15th Year
Engaged Buddhism: Ven. Bhikkhu Sanghasena Distributes Essential Supplies to 800 Families in Ladakh
Association of Korean Buddhist Orders Publishes Buddhist National Treasures of Korea
Giant Buddha Statue Unveiled in Iowa
Engaged Buddhist Ven. Bhikkhu Sanghasena Honored with A. P. J. Abdul Kalam World Peace Award