Ezra Klein's Entire Debate Strategy in Three Words

[TLDR: Pivot and Gaslight]

I listened to Waking Up Podcast #123 — Identity & Honesty | Sam Harris and I can't recommend it unless you want to hear two people talking past one another.

I did not know Ezra Klein very well head of listening to this podcast but I found him to be smug and evasive... and also well-rehearsed.  He barely answered anything directly but was really quick pivot and make his own tangentially related point.  And I was impressed with how little it costs for him to say how he “…just talked to so-and-so just a couple days ago…” any time a name was mentioned. 

Instant credibility!

Overall, I was bothered on a subconscious level by his manner of engagement and it took me a while understand the nature of the crime... to fully grasp that his entire tactic can be analogized to the following:

"I'm not an alcoholic! If anything, you're the alcoholic!"

(me: but I don't even drink!)

Sam says Klein is operating from a notion of identity politics?  Klein says Sam is also operating on identity politics.

And... It's a pretty slick maneuver to be able to smear Murray as a racist and then to tell Sam Harris that he has a blind spot because he's an "Anti-Anti-Racist".  Seriously... WTF is that?  A false dichotomy, I think.

gas·light

/ˈɡaslīt/

verb

manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.

Harris would do well not to invite gaslighters like Klein onto the show and I fully support him choosing not to talk to T. Coates for exactly the same reasons.  You can only hope to talk past a gaslighter because playing by their rules is a no-win situation.  (Heads, racist... Tails anti-anti-racist).

Choose: A Joint Search for Mutually Satisfactory Solutions OR A War of Wills and Ego

However you might feel about the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag and the larger movement, I think we can widely agree that "no parent should ever have to explain to their kids how to talk to the police so that they don't become an innocent victim someday".

If we put together all of the people that agree with that assessment, it is my opinion that we would have a clear majority in America.

Yet, much of the language that I see in the discussion of this is expressed in the language of a war of wills. Those-of-us-who-do chant the hashtag will continue to do so defiantly until those-of-us-who-do-not all give in. Or something...

We don't really know what the end game is. We don't know why we're arguing. All we know is we are labelling more and more people racist. (Once upon a time you actually had to do something against someone to be racist. Now all you have to do is take a nuanced position.)

I'll hazard a guess on the endgame if we continue down that road. A war of wills turns into a war of ego. No one likes to give in and they remember it in resentment when they do. (Yes, this is nearly verbatim from "Getting Past No." Wisdom doesn't have to be original... just true.)

The time for a program of awareness has come and gone. The people who care to be aware have overwhelming evidence that something strange is going on and it's going to be hard work to change it. The time is now ripe for a shift from awareness toward the joint search for mutually satisfactory solutions.

We need ideas. Specific ones. Ones that condemn neither Black Americans or Police Officers as being inherently wrong or at fault. Ones that don't attack white people for having been born white. Ones that don't condemn people who mean well but aren't sure what to do.

Condemning is cheap, lazy, and seductive. Do you have it within you to propose instead?

With specific proposals, we can leverage that majority that I think exists. We can name specific action. We can lead.

None of us chose this situation. No human being would. But it is in the nature of life as human that we must rise to take responsibility for things that are "not our fault".

To Enroll People To Your Cause, Respect Them

I just had an interaction online with an author on Medium. It will be my last one with this author. His style of "discussion" is not for me.

The author is one I have had interactions with in the past and they have been mostly civil and optimistic. Increasingly, I notice that he's being more free with his words. And I dismissed it last time when he dismissed my ideas as "crazy talk". This time, I have more data points to notice a pattern.

As background, the author is writing because he would like to get people off of the sidelines and into the streets in support of Black Lives Matter. In his recent article, the author stated:

What I don’t get is how anyone who believes they’ll never be able to understand what it’s like to be black in America (I interpret that as “because I’m not black I’ll never truly understand, so why try”) can believe that the Black Lives Matter movement is making the plight of black people worse?

It sounded like a statement of honest inquiry. So, I wrote two replies: One about how there is no substitute for direct experience. And another relating my experience of initial and evolving reactions to the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag.

And it turns out that he wasn't interested in understanding such a perspective any better. Maybe he's frustrated, but he was also disrespectful in his reply and I decided that maybe we weren't people who could have a discussion after all.

What I notice is that he engaged in name-calling rather than to acknowledge that my sharing of what I notice may have some value as part of the discussion, even as he might disagree. I also noticed some assymetry. As pertains to his cause, he wants you to relate to his experience (i.e. "Understand what it's like to be black in America..."). But as pertaining to my experience, a quick glance at his reply suggests that he only wants me to understand his reasoning.

Empathy isn't a one-way street. Is it?

What sort of person expects your empathy but grants you none in return? Apparently, a person that also can't seem to talk about your perspective without also diminishing it at the same time. He called my words, "floating a turd" and included quips like "no shit". Is this respectful?

Now I have no problem with disagreement. But my minimum bar is respect for what I have to say. And if my interlocutor can't grant me that, our interchange does not qualify as a civil discussion.

Maybe he feels like blame and name-calling and false either-or dichotomies are the way to get people off the sidelines but I know nearly no one who will join a cause because a proponent of that movement was disrespectful to what they had to say.

What An Invitation Looks Like

How would I go about inviting people to come off the sidelines?

Look... You may not agree or even get what Black Lives Matter is about but we are on the streets to protest unequal handling by law enforcement. We may not know exactly what policies to propose, but if you joined us for a walk, we can at least show that we do not support the way things are now. And if you're there, fewer bad things may happen to us while we are out there. We don't want trouble, we just want the law to be applied equally to all. Can you walk with us?

That's it.

I wouldn't tell you what you ought to think or how you need to change yourself (or whether you're part of the problem because of what you say).

I'd tell you what I notice.

And if I wanted your help, I'd ask very specifically what kind of help and explain why it is needed.

As a person appealing to another person's humanity, I would muster every effort to be patient and calm. This would be hard. The situation is grossly unjust, which is a trigger issue for me. It makes me furious. My blood boils every time I think about it.

But my triggers are my responsibility even if they are not my fault. They are mine to notice and to figure out how to deal with because I am a grown-assed man and I take that seriously.

You Can't Influence Someone While Judging Them

The reason I shared my perspective with the author at all is that I think there are many people who would rise to a respectful and specific invitation. They won't do it because what you said made them feel guilty. They won't do it if they have concerns that a demonstration might turn into an uncontrolled mob.

They don't like feeling attacked and don't help those who seem to attack. They're not stupid and they're not unjust, so don't even suggest it.

I think a great many people who are not black do care and would help but they aren't exactly sure how, when, or where. These people need to be organized and lead by some calm, collected people who respect them and do the hard work to enroll them into the cause.

Their daily lives are important to them. Your cause is important to you. Yes your cause is also important to them because it's a universal principle, but that point is subtle and hard to get across. Respect that.

Everyone has their priorities and you're asking people to change it. RESPECT THAT.

Respect everyone.

And if you can't? Then expect people who care to stay on the sidelines. And console yourself with your name-calling and casting of aspersions. Those grapes were probably sour anyway.

References

The Reason You Can’t Understand What Black Americans Are Going Through

To Really Hear People, Ask Them About Personal Experiences and Opinions

I have this really cool friend I know from dancing and keep in touch with via the BookFace.  She is a master at the open-ended question that gets everyone to answer.  I've never seen her equal.

The other day, she came out with a question aimed at "people of color".  Now normally, I don't readily subscribe to a label like that, but in this case, I decided to reply since I tend to participate in discussions on racism when they are sincere attempts at discussion.  And since I liked some of what I wrote I am reposting it here on my blog.

Here was my initial reply:

The only time I ever felt bad about how others treated me on race was elementary school, where all Asians were "Chinese". Some people think that once you know a person's race that's all you need to know about them. That's a long time ago now and though I don't feel upset when I encounter it these days, I do feel a bit of pity for how small the world is for some.

So... to feel heard better? Here's my answer (and if you're my friend, there's really no opportunity for improvement because I already get this from you)

Look at me as a person: an individual, not as a representative of any class, race, or group. I don't fit cleanly into any of those. Only boring people do. 

Continue to ask me questions as if there weren't any labels already attached to me. There are always more pleasant surprises to find.

Later in the thread, someone else posted a reply which brought up a question which is a peeve for a lot of people: "Where are you REALLY from?".  If you're not white, you've heard this one.  (Hell, maybe you hear it when you're a caucasoid as well).

I replied that I answer with:

I was born in America and I tend to answer "New York", when people ask me about country of origin. This usually leads down a path where I describe the country "my parents came from".

To which my friend further stated a possible motive for the peeve-inducing question and then asked my opinion on what ways I would suggest to ask about the larger topic: 

"I think the question people are trying to ask is if you identify with a longer family heritage other than just American. Most of my Asian friends are 1st, 2nd, or 3rd generation Americans which is a lot shorter time than me and, honestly, way more interesting. I have no idea how long my family has been here...

Is there a way that someone can ask about your heritage or family customs without making you feel like an outsider or like you are being put in a neat, stereotypical box?"

I wrote a lengthy reply which includes a list of questions that I would ask in order to inquire about the nature of a person's relationship to the culture they come from.  And I looked for a pattern among the questions.  The pattern was that that most of my questions take care to ask the inquiree about their own personal experiences with their culture and upbringing. 

Honest questions asked with an authentic desire for inquiry are usually pretty disarming. Especially if the inquiry is about the inquiree. So you have an advantage here that doesn't come naturally to a lot of people. That being said, I would dare to say this to everyone: 

There is no shame in asking questions if the intent is one of richer connection. Yes you might fail. You may give offense. But wouldn't you rather fail in trying than fail because you gave up?

All of that being said, let me warn you about "way more interesting". It's possible that a person's family history is more interesting to you than it is to them. The importance of family to them may be different than you expect. The advice I have here is to make no assumptions. Make as few assumptions about a person's relationship to the culture they come from as you would about what a person's religion might mean about their beliefs and habits.

If you wanted me to be more specific about what way a person could ask questions to explore interest, I guess I would ask these questions in this order (assuming I have a friendly relationship with a person such that they'd chat 1:1 with me):

- What's your family life like? Are you close now? Do you want to be?
- What was it like growing up with your parents? Were they strict? Supportive? Affectionate? Formal?
- How many siblings do you have? Did you get along?
- What are the biggest celebrations you remember having as a kid? What kind of food was involved? What did you like best about it? What didn't you like?
- What traditions do you want to keep from the way you grew up which most Americans don't do? What traditions do you think are kind of backward that you hope most Americans never start doing?
- What's the best advice your dad/mom ever gave you?
- What do you admire most about your parents? grandparents? 
- What values do you think are underrated in America (Canada)? What do we take for granted?
- What traditions have you taken on that are *NOT* from your culture/parents?
- etc...

I think you could ask these of any person of any color and you will have an interesting discussion. Though really, the person you're talking to might feel interviewed by the end unless you find a way to make a conversation of it.

I am noticing that most of my questions take care to ask the inquiree about their own personal experiences with and opinion about their culture and upbringing. And they are less about the inquirer's notions about what it's like to be [insert culture here]. (again... This is something you do rather naturally)

My questions also respect that there are always things to love and hate in any culture.

One last comment... my family is much more interesting to me now than when I was younger. So you might be surprised if you should ever revisit these questions with a close friend. For me personally, the story has changed as life and time have worked to wear down my many rough edges as a person. 

---

Photo Credit: lost in thoughts... lost in prayers | Rajarshi Mitra | Flickr