Mailbox: Your questions on Trump, 'privilege' and compromise
What do you do when someone on your own side lets you down — or a family member says their politics are "none of your business"? In our second mailbox episode, Mónica and producer Jessica Jones tackle listener questions about whether America's founding was a failure to bridge, how to recognize our own blind spots, and what Mónica's parents really think of President Trump. Plus, April Lawson joins in with advice for approaching a firmly closed door. Want to send us your question? Email abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com!
Credits
Host & Executive Producer: Mónica Guzmán
Guest: Jaime Settle, Department Chair and Professor of Government at William & Mary
Senior Producer: Tracy Egbas
Producer: Jessica Jones
Associate Producer & Graphic Designer: Fredo Viola
Contributors: April Lawson & Travis Tripodi
Artist in Residence: Gangstagrass
A production of Reclaim Curiosity
Distribution Partners: KUOW, Braver Angels, and Deseret News
Financial Supporter: M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust
Links & References
Call to Action
Submit a question: If you've been impacted or taken action because of the podcast, let us know. Or if you found yourself mulling over something, turn it into a question and share it with us. You can send us a quick email at abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com
Subscribe: If you like what you've heard, hit subscribe, and leave us a 5-star review!
Share this episode: reclaimcuriosity.com/post/a-braver-way-episode-25
Follow us: @abraverway on Instagram and YouTube and @moniguzman on Instagram
Join our text line: Text "brave" to 206-926-9955 to join.
Transcript
Please note that this transcript has been lightly edited for readability with the help of AI. Please forgive any slight errors.
[00:00:00]
Mónica Guzmán:
Hi, everyone. Welcome to A Braver Way. I'm Mónica Guzmán, your guide across the divide, and today, once again, I am joined by the fabulous, the inimitable, the incredible —
Jessica Jones:
Stop.
Mónica:
Producer Jessica Jones. Hey, Jess. How are you?
Jessica:
I'm good. I'm excited to do this again. It was really fun the first time.
Mónica:
It was. Okay, so what we are here to do — and we've done before — is a mailbox episode. This is where we take the questions you all have been sending in, and Jessica puts them in boxes, actual boxes. Jess, do you want to show them for our video viewers?
Jessica:
Yes! And I think your favorite label is "tough."
Mónica:
Tough. Those are the tough questions. It makes it sound like — you could read it two ways. You could say, "This is the tough one," or "We're not gonna do it." No, but we are.And last time we did a review, and I feel like it's worth saying again: Jessica is very crafty and had all of these things at hand. This is just the way the playful mind works here at Reclaim Curiosity and at A Braver Way Podcast, so fun times.So thank you again to everybody who sent in your questions. We are endlessly curious about how you're reacting to the episodes, but also to the world and the project of meeting division with strength. What does that mean to you? Where are you finding your edges on that? Where are you super confounded? These are great points to send something in to us. Our email is abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com. We read them all. We love them all. Please send them in. And also, you can join our text line by texting the word "brave" to 206-926-9955, and then I can text you, which is kinda fun. We've got several questions that came in from the text line, so join in. It's a party.
Jessica:
I'm still impressed that you can just rattle off that phone number.
Mónica:
It's really in my head now. Okay, so what kind of question should we start with, Jess?
Jessica:
I think we should start with "About You" again, because we still have a bunch of those. Okay, here we go — we're going right in the deep end from the very beginning. This is from Rich in Florida, and it's very nicely phrased: "Hopefully it's not an out-of-bounds question, but wondering if your parents, both or either, ever had doubts about their support for the president."
Mónica:
I get a version of this question so frequently when I travel. At the Q&A portion of something, someone's always like, "Do they still support Trump?"So to take a step back — and obviously our listeners are from all across the political divide — I hear about this a lot. I went ahead and asked my parents directly, because I didn't want to assume. People change, you know? So I texted them, and my dad texted immediately back: "I have never had doubts." Clear. Clear as a bell. Thank you, Dad. So Dad has never had doubts, has voted three times for Trump, and is still very much supporting the president.And then my mom sent back a voice memo — sometimes she and I communicate that way — and she explained pretty thoroughly where she's at. She has also never doubted her support of the president. She believes Trump was the right leader in 2016 because she thought the country needed major change. She thought he was even more necessary after Biden because of what she saw as reckless policies on immigration. Keep in mind, my family is a family of immigrants. She came from Mexico, and that does not make her necessarily liberal or Democrat in her preferred policies on immigration. She's been quite conservative and Republican in those policies for my whole life.She says she supports Trump primarily because of what she sees in his character and effectiveness — which I know, if you're on the left, you'll hear that and go, "What?"
Jessica:
Yeah, that's going to set some people off.
Mónica:
It can. But I've had lots of conversations with my mom. I know what she means. For her and my dad, Trump has a lot of courage, a lot of guts. He doesn't play other people's games. She's always felt like he has enough money and resources that he isn't motivated primarily by money. She believes he genuinely loves the country and is motivated by that, and that he's willing to do the difficult things that other politicians won't.So it's a very good thing to my mom that he was never elected before and that he came in from the outside. She evaluates him mainly by his policies, not his rhetoric. She does not like everything he says or does — she finds him super impulsive, really mean sometimes. She tries to judge him by the result of his policies rather than his style or his tone. So she's just put style and tone in the backseat, and she focuses on other things.For her, national security is a really, really big concern. She thinks the United States is safer and more respected internationally under Trump, that countries are more afraid of us, and that that's good. And she believes Trump is judged unfairly a lot, especially by liberals.
[00:05:00]
Mónica:
She's never doubted her support, and she even said that if the election were held this year, she would vote for him again. But she knows he's not supposed to run for another term. She doesn't want him to run for another term — but if that were the timing of things, yeah, she thinks the presidency has produced good results.I also want to say to this listener — Rich had said, "I hope it's not out of bounds." I passed that on, and my mom's reaction was, "Why would he think that was out of bounds? Does he think I'm embarrassed by my support?" And I was like, "No, I don't think so, but let me check." I emailed Rich, and Rich was like, "Oh, no. I just thought maybe it's a very personal question." And my mom was like, "No, it's fine. I love talking about it."
Jessica:
That's amazing that she's such an open book. And upon reflection of hearing that answer, what I think is so beautiful is all I heard is you seeking to understand their perspective and not trying to change their mind.
Mónica:
I mean, it doesn't work, so why would I try — that's one thing. I've of course tried to change their mind, and they have tried hard to change mine. It's not a thing. We've learned that. At least not while maintaining a lot of respect and the relationships we value so much with each other.And great question. I think me and my family at this point, we don't mind being pretty open about these things, because a lot of families are pretty closed about it, and we're happy to be the counterexample.
Jessica:
The story illustrates it is possible to have that relationship, and that's a really powerful thing. So thank you all for being so open.Okay, one more About You. This is from Judith in Sweden — another international listener.
[00:09:36]
Mónica:
Sweden! I love Scandinavia. I've gotta get my butt over there. Yeah, anyway — go visit Judith.
Jessica:
Her question is: "What is the hardest person for you personally to sit at the table with?"
Mónica:
Mmm. This question is tricky, because I feel like there's a gap between what people expect me to say and what I would actually say. The expectation would be that I would pick someone from the other side with really horrendous, awful beliefs. I understand why that would be the expectation.But when I think of this practically, and where some of that sense of resistance and difficulty comes up for me, it tends to happen with people who are on my side — who I may agree with ideologically and politically, but I strongly disagree with their style and their tactics.We just talked about how my mother puts tone and style in the backseat. I don't. Because to me, so much of tone and style is about the glue that holds us together — discussion, conversation, debate. Persuasion works when we can receive each other.So I'm not gonna name names, but there are people I see on social media, some people I've met, who in their minds are doing the soldiering thing they've gotta do. But when I see how they talk about other people and treat other people in their words and assumptions — ugh. And what's hard is that if I'm at the same table with them, my integrity would make me wanna say something. I don't know what to say. I pride myself on trying to always say the unsaid, figure out how to bring it up. And I feel like I would just wither.It's easier in my mind to think about asking someone with really unsavory beliefs on the other side — as long as I'm safe, obviously — questions about those views, than it is to challenge someone on my own side sometimes. Especially if they have a big following. Ugh.So I think it's kind of that. It's the shared expectations, the fact that we're on the same side, and frankly, that they would probably really disagree with me. They're the people who would say, "You idiot bridge-builder. You're not exclusively on the attack?"And again, I should say — being on the attack is absolutely useful. I think everything needs to be in balance. But person to person, I just see some folks who have such a platform and such an opportunity to try to engender understanding, and what I see them doing instead is engendering more division and contempt. There's a categorization of this called "conflict entrepreneur." The author Amanda Ripley coined that. So it's like — what are you doing? I just wanna shake them.
Jessica:
You're not helping.
Mónica:
"You're not helping." The thing you posted — I agree with it, and part of me went "Yes," and then I realized it's not helping.And let me say again — this is exactly the kind of thing that puts out the myth that a bridge-builder is just nice. No. Sometimes you have to be really forceful. You have to disrupt people's sense of peace in order ultimately to build something more like peace all over the place. It's not about being nice. It's about how you can talk about people you haven't checked in with, that you don't know. Really, come on.You got me going, Judith in Sweden.
Jessica:
There's a lot of spiciness today.
Mónica:
We have warmed up. Watch out.
[00:14:51]
Jessica:
Okay. We have one question in the self-reflection category. This is from Bernie in Minnesota: "How do you stay curious without being overwhelmed, confused, or sucked into the fighting? And how do you actually learn what the other side believes?"
Mónica:
That's like four questions in one.The heart of the question to me is: how do you stay curious without being overwhelmed? That speaks to capacity. Tending to your capacity to be curious and open, because it's not something you can just rely on forever. It's not something you get to and coast.If you're tired, if you're feeling more activated emotionally, if you have fear responses and trauma responses — all of these things can moderate your capacity to be curious. If it's a particular topic where you're carrying a lot of weight from past experiences, your storytelling brain is going to tell stories that are really going to not make you want to stay open.So curiosity has a capacity, and for me, it's not about trying to bust through that capacity all the time to get to some standard. It's about being at the edge of your capacity, because that's how you grow. So that's why I say: this work is not about "I'm gonna talk to a Nazi tomorrow." This work is about who is the person that's more of a low-risk exposure for me — someone I know well, but there's this one thing — and you go and chat with them, and you have the capacity for that, and you build from there.The trick is: don't be too comfortable. If you're at the center of your capacity, you're not growing it. You're not learning things that's going to grow your ability to see more of what the world really is.Also, practice a defiant process of curiosity. To me, curiosity's the real resistance. There are many corners of society that expect people to play along with their tribe, follow the same script, including just attack, attack, attack. What becomes defiant and counter-cultural is the conversation that dares to ask questions, that dares to pause on the assumption, "Maybe I don't know why that person believes that, and I shouldn't assume this bad thing." Then it becomes an act of real courage to go and ask.So get curious about the fighting. Why is the fighting happening? How did it happen, and do you need to be engaged in it? What are your goals? In a lot of cases, when we're so polarized, if you want the world to change in the way you want it to change, a lot of the battles going on out there are more performative than effective. Ask hard questions about that.And meet real people whenever possible. In the four years we've known each other, I've gone up and down on how much I get sucked into the news. I came up as a journalist and needed to be steeped in what was going on. It's taken a long time to decondition some of that. Sometimes I wake up in the morning, read ten headlines, and I can't. It's just too much.
[00:20:00]
Jessica:
There's probably also an aspect of your capacity being different day to day, depending on the situation and how much you care about it. So it's also recognizing those differences and choosing when you want to push that edge.
Mónica:
Exactly. If you know you're already burned through some stuff, now might not be a great day to chase all the spiciest headlines. It's really helpful for me to talk to real people who have different ideas rather than stay cloistered in my own house, just staring at my phone. Tend to your capacity, resist false certainty, get curious about whatever you think you're supposed to be doing — and be defiant.
Jessica:
I'm going to say your book really helped me a lot. I used to be someone who would fight with random people on the internet. And I love politics — I actually really love to debate politics. That's why I'm in this business. But I realized it was not serving me. Your concept of containment, and talking to the people I actually care about — it's made me an overall much happier, more balanced person.
Mónica:
Yay! That's wonderful. But it's a process. You don't just get there and coast. I wrote a book about it — who cares? I'm still working on it. You just have to constantly work on this.
Jessica:
You're still human. And I think that's the key. Truth. Okay, where should we go?
Mónica:
Where to go?
Jessica:
Let's go to "Tough!" Exclamation point. This is a really interesting one. This is from John in Pennsylvania: "Was the American Revolution, 250 years ago, a failure to bridge the gap across differences between Patriot colonists and Loyalist colonists?"
Mónica:
I love it. That is a fun one. So — clearly, if they had just bridged, we'd all be eating crumpets and drinking tea.
Jessica:
We love you, British people.
Mónica:
So this got me thinking. Violence — to me, violence is always evidence that some conversation or conflict resolution failed. But it's not always evidence that violence itself is unjustified. I don't think bridge-building is pacifism. I don't think that's the end goal bridge-building necessarily gets you every time.But I do think that the more practice and skill a society has to have the tough conversations across difference — when people feel slighted, when differences seem insurmountable — that's when the magic can happen. You can find the compromise, you can find the way to continue. Sometimes you're not supposed to continue in this way. Sometimes the divorce is necessary, and it can be bloodless. Justified violence exists. Justified ruptures exist. Sometimes people just need to go their separate ways.But I feel like you can't ever really know that it's what's needed until all parties are able to put all their concerns on the table and have that conversation. So the more that people really, truly try to bridge-build, the stronger their argument for eventual rupture is going to be. And the more capable they are of avoiding violence.
Jessica:
This whole time I'm hearing the Hamilton soundtrack in my mind. So there you go.
Mónica:
Totally. And Hamilton's character in the musical — there's a line where he tells Aaron Burr, "I'd rather be divisive than indecisive." I think that's such an important implication for bridge-building. Let's not have bridge-building be "hoity-toity twiddle our thumbs." That's a waste of time. That's hiding behind the comfort of, "We're just here being peaceful." It's like, yeah, but what about justice?At the Braver Angels Convention in June, we read the Declaration of Independence — all of us, all thousand of us. It was so cool. Because the Declaration is this statement of reasons. We petitioned, we appealed, we warned, and we were ignored. So here we are now. And I appreciate how it was written — the argument was, we tried and tried and failed. There were these walls we hit, and these are the rights we see, and we're just not going to move on them because this is what's right. So the more that people really, really try to bridge-build, then the stronger their argument for eventual rupture is going to be.Thank you, John from Pennsylvania.
[00:27:57]
Jessica:
Okay. I think we should go political, because we're kind of in it already. This is from Colleen in Texas: "How do you get someone to recognize their privilege?"
Mónica:
The word "privilege" is far more likely to be used and respected by folks on the left than folks on the right. It's one of those many parts of our language that have become pretty contested. I've used that word in front of conservatives and they're like, "Ugh, here we go again." They see a lot of loaded meanings in there.So how do you get someone to recognize their privilege? Where my mind went was trying to find a way of talking about this that we could all get around, no matter how you feel about that word. "Blind spots" is where I fall, and I know it's not a perfect synonym — privilege is about people not seeing the ways in which they have a kind of power or dominance. But we all have blind spots.The word "privilege" can sometimes make it easy to think, "Well, I know my privilege — I know my race privilege, my wealth privilege — so I'm good. I don't have any blind spots left." And that's not true. Depending on who you talk to, you might recognize there's a kind of blind spot you didn't know you had.There's something I remembered from when I was at Braver Angels as a nonprofit. I would host team meetings with a check-in question at the start — something like, "What was your favorite spring break vacation?" And the new person on our team had not gone to college, so it was kinda awkward when we got to him. And I felt silly. I recognized: "Oh, yeah. I didn't see that line of difference. I made this blanket assumption that we'd all gone to college." Why? Because every other job I've ever had, I've always worked with people with four-year college degrees. I'm really grateful to having worked at Braver Angels because there were several people who had not gone to college and hadn't had the same background I had in a bunch of other ways.What happened there is that reality interrupted my assumptions, and relationships allowed me to see my blind spots. So that's what really helps — relationships. When people mostly hang out with people who are just like them, we're always steeped in our environment. It forms us. The world looks a certain way because this is the path I've walked.So a lot of people don't see their privilege — or whatever it is — because it hasn't been demonstrated to them. They don't see a contrast because they don't know anybody who's different from them in these ways. It's like fish and water. You don't even know you're swimming in water.
[00:32:00]
Jessica:
So reach out — connect with another human who is different than you.
Mónica:
Exactly. Blind spots become visible when we encounter lives that are different from our own. There is no contrast if you're never hanging out with a different shade of something. You just don't see it.And the next best thing is to represent it. At this point, I'm really happy to carry the stories of a lot of people I care about — including people who are nothing like me. When I'm with somebody and they're seeming skeptical about someone's experience, and I actually know someone like that, I will share: "You know, I know this person, and they're exactly who you're talking about. And I think they're really cool, and they said this, and they did that." And then the other person goes, "Oh, okay." But it's only because of the relationship — both ways — that that can happen. All those relationships need to be sound enough for the transmission to happen.And I have so many more blind spots I haven't seen, so I hope they come to me.
Jessica:
Amazing. Okay, we only have three categories left — more About You, more Tough, and then About How to Talk to Other People.
Mónica:
Oh, let's go there.
[00:34:52]
Jessica:
This is from Judy in Washington: "Do you have any suggestions on how to tenderly, lovingly, and respectfully respond should someone say, 'My views and reasons for voting this way are none of your business'?"
Mónica:
This one — I remember reading Judy's question and thinking, "I really want April on this one." April Lawson, a great friend of mine. She and I are of opposite views politically. I just recently reached out to April and said, "Hey, would you be willing to take a look at this and let's record something together?" So through the magic of editing, we're going to drop it right in.Boom — April, hi.
April Lawson:
Hello! So good to see you.
Mónica:
So good to see you, too. Thank you for joining me on this listener question. Let me roll it out. This is from Judy in Washington State. She says her sister told her that her desire to talk about their differing views is not something she is interested in, and that her views are none of Judy's business. Judy is joining her for a seven-day walking pilgrimage — they'll have a lot of time together — and she really wants to get to a deeper level of conversation with her. Any suggestions on how to tenderly, lovingly, and respectfully respond should her sister say, "My views and reasons for voting this way are none of your business"?So, just absorbing that for a moment. A couple things I would say to Judy.First — there's a way in which your sister is right. Her politics and her reasons are her business, and the same is true for yours. There's no coercion here, no trickery. It has to be your sister's choice to want to talk to you. So where your power and your agency is: what can you do to make the conditions so good and interesting that she would want to join you in a conversation and want to open up?You've got to get her buy-in. It's best to be straightforward about this. Sometimes people are afraid they're going to be tricked. So be careful — the trust you have with your sister is so precious. Sometimes the really candid, vulnerable, direct approach is a really good one. "Can I tell you why this is so important to me? Because you're right, this is your business. So I'm your sister, and I think there's something I'd like for you to hear from me about why this matters."Another thing: even if you can't talk about her politics yet, maybe you can try to understand why she has needed to put this wall up in the first place. What is she afraid of? And then your job is to try to lessen those fears, truly. Go ahead, April.
[00:39:26]
April:
I think that's really good. There is always an answer to that question — we don't know exactly what it is, but a lot of people are attacked in ways they'd rather not experience again for their views. So even just inviting her sister to share about whatever that is can begin to open things up.I love what you said about creating the conditions. It actually reminds me of a section in the book Women Who Run With the Wolves, by Clarissa Pinkola Estés. It's about anger, and there's a sort of fable about how to approach either your own anger, or someone who's angry. It goes like this:A woman goes to a healer in her village and says, "I can't figure out how to interact with my anger. Can you help me?" And the healer says, "Yes. I will make a potion, and I have all the ingredients except one: an eyelash from a tiger that lives on the mountain. You need to acquire that for me, and then I will make the potion."The woman is terrified, but she really wants this. So she goes up the mountain. Eventually she gets to the tiger's cave, and first she just approaches from a distance, watches, and then leaves. She comes back the next day and watches a little more and then leaves. The next day she brings some food and puts it about twenty yards away, then leaves.She comes back the next day, and he's eaten some of the food. So she fills it back up and puts it a little closer this time. This continues until eventually she's able to be there with the tiger as he's eating. The last stage: he's eating out of her hands. And she says, "Mr. Tiger, could I please have one of your eyelashes?" He says, "Come back tomorrow, and I'll think about it." So she makes her best food, and she goes to him, and he says, "I've decided to give you what you want." She reaches up, plucks an eyelash, and runs back down to the healer.She brings the eyelash to the healer, who promptly throws it in the fire. And the woman says, "Oh no, what have you done? I worked so hard for that." And the healer says, "You've learned what you need to know. Go and treat your anger like that — slowly moving towards it — and that will eventually dry it out, like the tiger in the cave."That's basically what I think it is: slowly making it safe.
Mónica:
Oh, that's beautiful. And this makes me think: Judy may need to be prepared to answer the question from her sister — "Why do you care so much? Why do you even want to know this?" So it's a little bit like that. Take time with your own reasons for wanting something. What is really motivating you?And I shouldn't say too quickly that her sister's politics aren't Judy's business. She's her sister. We have expectations of other people. Is it the attachment to her sister? Is it a kind of expectation, a kind of obligation she feels? Be so honest about that with yourself, so that when you answer your sister, she knows you're telling the truth.And I like that in the eyelash story, she didn't try to steal it. It eventually was an invitation that was accepted.
April:
That's right. And I've had to do this in a lot of cases — sit with, "But why do I care?" Because sometimes people who have not wanted to share something with me have correctly sensed that something about me, some discomfort I had, was driving my asking, and they didn't want to engage that.I also think: if you can stay firmly in a posture of curiosity, be prepared not to answer. This has to be only about curiosity and connection. I had a fight with someone recently, and I was really impressed with him because he fought well — and part of what that looked like was he kept saying, "I care about this because I want to stay connected to you. I want to deepen our connection." Reiterating that as you go through.
Mónica:
Come back to that. Reiterate the connection. Also — remind her of her freedom. There's no demand here. There's an invitation. If the invitation feels too big, make it smaller. One kind of radical move: if she's kinda opening up and you sense an opening, you could say, "Would you mind just telling me about one view? And I won't even respond. I promise I'll just listen. I'll ask a question of clarification if I have it, but I won't respond — I'll just think on it. And tomorrow, if you'll let me, we can continue." Give her that control, because these are her views.
April:
So beautiful. I just really appreciate the question, because I think a lot of people have it, and it's hard to know what to do. But I understand the care that is behind it.
Mónica:
Yeah, and honestly, the fact that there is so much care tells me they're going to be all right.Thanks, April.
[00:45:47]
Jessica:
Both perspectives on that topic. I had never gotten that question before — it's really good.
Mónica:
It's a really interesting question. Okay, next. I'm ready. Bring it.
Jessica:
Going into the Tough category. This is from Alyssa in Utah: "Does being open to compromise make me a moderate?"
Mónica:
I remember some of the context Alyssa gave — it did have a bit of that accusatory tinge. "You must be a moderate," as if to say, "You're weak on all convictions." Which is probably unfair to real moderates, because real moderates can be quite strong in their convictions. A real political moderate would say it's not for lack of courage that they landed where they are — they think that's the best place to be, ideologically.So, that said about moderates. No, being open to compromise absolutely does not make you a political or ideological moderate. We need to make a distinction between ideological moderation and temperamental moderation. Being open to compromise is about temperance. It's not about what you believe — it's how you hold your beliefs.We mistake that, probably because in our world, it's the people on the wings of an ideology who get rewarded by our algorithms and our conflict-loving media. We tend to hear from them more and say, "Wow, they're the real fighters. They're so brave because they're saying things that are more whatever." And so moderates look weak by comparison. That's not true. That's just the amplification engines of our media. It's got nothing to do with the substance of the beliefs or the strength of the ideas.Temperamental moderation is it. And I have met wonderful people on the wings of our political ideologies who temperamentally are able to give other people's convictions the same respect they want for their own. That's the magic — when you can receive other people's ideas the way you want to be received. A little of that golden rule: listen to other people the way you would want to be heard.This is what I wish I could shake everybody into. It's not about being nice — it's about being effective. Human evolution has brought us far from the caveman days, and we've learned that this extraordinary ability to communicate can work miracles. Good negotiation, conflict resolution, people sharing what they need and then transforming the landscape together so that everyone finds something they can live with — that's a miracle.So no, being open to compromise probably makes you effective. Now, you've gotta know your convictions. Every good negotiator knows what they can be more flexible around, and what seems non-negotiable. The real courage, I think, is about taking even the non-negotiable thing and just being willing — if somebody's got a different way of looking at it that could transform the way you see it — just being willing to hear them. Because being willing to hear somebody doesn't mean you're suddenly going to do something about it. It gives you more freedom. I still get to choose what to do about it.
[00:51:00]
Jessica:
I think about the amazing episode we had with Governor Cox. And as part of that episode, we talked to Troy Williams.
Mónica:
Troy Williams. Yes.
Jessica:
Governor Cox, for those who don't know, is on the right — the governor of Utah, and he'd tell you himself he's a proud conservative. And Troy Williams is an LGBTQ leader in the state. They have this really positive relationship together. They come to the table and pass legislation they could all get behind to support the mental health of youth in their state. They're kind of the living embodiment of what you're talking about — and they could not disagree more.
Mónica:
Exactly. They are not ideologically moderate. Governor Cox is conservative and Troy is not. So it's like — can you develop the wisdom to recognize when compromise is going to serve your values? When it's going to help you get what you want?And you can decide, when something is on the table, "Actually, that's too important. I can't give that up, so let's wait. Let's come back. We're going to need to transform something. Either you have to transform something or I do, but we can't do it by berating each other." It's best done by coming together, sitting together, having the conversations that start to cook stuff up and change all the little cells in our brains that tell us it can only be this way. That's when things are transformative — when you're in conversation.Great question, Alyssa.
[00:53:20]
Jessica:
All right. We're going to go back to About Monica for a minute. This is from Dinah — or Dina, forgive me if I'm pronouncing it incorrectly — from Michigan: "What keeps you up at night?"
Mónica:
Hmm. "What keeps you up at night" could either mean you watched a horror movie — I do that a lot, we've talked about this — or it could mean the potential real-life concerns of our daily lives. I'll try to give reality, not expectation.The thing that actually keeps me up at night is not what I can't control, but what I can. That didn't always used to be true. I would stay up more about what's going to happen in some faraway place, people I don't know who are going to impact me. Of course we worry. But I worry far, far more about what I'm doing or not doing.For me, politically, I feel very lucky that who I am and what I do doesn't feel like it's in the line of fire, as it might be for lots of other folks. But I stay up at night wondering: am I using my platform and the connections I've made and the things I've learned in the best way? Are they meeting my values? Am I working hard enough? It's a lot of, "I'm probably not doing the right thing. I should be doing this differently."And sometimes there are crises of — what if I've developed blind spots I should be seeing? What if conversation isn't really powerful enough for all these things? What if I'm totally wrong and I'm spending my energy in the wrong places? Am I really practicing what I preach? I'll replay a conversation I had that day with someone I disagreed with and think, "Was that really what I needed to say? Do I need to be doing more?"I feel the most aligned and hopeful when I feel like I'm participating and that participation is making the most of my strengths and what I can control. I don't like feeling passive. That's what keeps me up at night — what am I doing? What am I not doing? What should I be doing?And let me throw one more thing in. I think it's a Buddhist teacher who said something like, "Why worry about the things you can't control? There's nothing you can do." And then the second part was, "Why worry about the things you can control? Because the things you can control — why worry instead of act? Just plan and act." I come back to that sometimes.
Jessica:
That's lovely. Just make a plan if you can.
[00:57:54]
Jessica:
Okay, this is a tough one. I'll say being in Seattle, I really feel this one. This is from Cubby in Washington: "Why do we have such a hard time with people who are ideologically similar to us? The infighting — it's a real thing on both sides of the aisle."
Mónica:
Cubby, this is it. There was a question earlier about who I couldn't sit at the table with, and it's people ideologically similar to me with different expectations.I think political tribes create this illusion that shared political identity yields shared conclusions. You're supposed to believe the same things I do, have the same style. And of course that can't possibly be right. It's also harder to direct curiosity toward people who share something with you. This is also why within a family it's so much harder — there are relationships and expectations. "How could my own brother believe that?" It's: how could somebody who stands next to me on this issue, who I respect for this and that, then go off and believe that? We don't give them the benefit of the doubt. It feels like a betrayal.I emailed Cubby, and Cubby got back with some really interesting context. They sense this happening — and this is just Cubby's own experience — when they learn that their kids' friends' parents still read them Harry Potter. Cubby is trans and has some thoughts about J.K. Rowling. So when that comes up — yeah, a little bit of "ugh," a little bit of betrayal.But I love what Cubby wrote, so I'm just going to read it verbatim: "I almost feel like I can answer my own question, that it's something about being shaken out of a perceived sense of safety, and a lot of us have finally started to see that our echo chambers of algorithmically optimized content has reduced friction in a way that has limited our tolerance for relational discomfort."Oof. Isn't that good? And then Cubby says: "But I know your podcast enough to know that you will get to some nuance I'm missing, more depth in understanding why even minor differences with people we trust feel so dangerous or what to do about it. Because it also really feels like we should start there because I think the tiny rifts are supposed to be just practice."Yes. We tell ourselves the ideological rifts are the toughest to cross, but I think it's relational. Where there's a relationship, there's a set of expectations. There can be things like betrayal and disappointment that simply don't exist with a group of people we've already put way over there.So it's so much harder to practice curiosity with the people who feel proximate to us, and to catch yourself in your own assumptions. So lots of credit to Cubby for noticing this about themselves. I can tell that you think, Cubby, that something about this assumption is probably unfair. It's about those tiny rifts that you haven't even talked to the person about. Maybe they have a completely different reason for still reading Harry Potter.The answer is always curiosity. This time it's: aim your curiosity at your own expectations. What led you to those expectations? And would you want this person to be free to have their own choices? Probably. So — get curious. Ask, "What did I expect from someone that I considered one of us? What does that circle I've just drawn mean anyway?" Because sharing an identity does not erase differences in personality, values, temperament, and judgment. We are all really different.
[01:03:00]
Jessica:
This makes me think back to our friend Luis Mojica — we had a wonderful episode with him about finding safety within yourself. The way that Luis was talking about it has been really transformative for me. You can be okay if someone is disagreeing with you. If your sense of being okay is that everybody has to agree on everything, you're going to be in turmoil all the time. Know thyself, be grounded in thyself. "You believe that, I believe this." We are different people, and it's okay. We can coexist.
Mónica:
Right. And Cubby even put it in their own email: "being shaken out of a perceived sense of safety." Keyword: perceived. Somebody has a different idea than you — it may feel like danger, but is it? So really, it's about curiosity. Aim your curiosity at your own expectations. Sharing an identity does not erase differences in personality, in values, in temperament, in judgment. We are all really different. And that's okay.
Jessica:
And that's okay.
Mónica:
That's okay. Look at that. Everybody's going to be just fine. We're all great. It's all rainbows and butterflies.
[01:05:20]
Jessica:
Okay. This is one about you again, and it's actually also from Judith in Sweden — they had a couple questions for you. This one: "What was the thing that triggered you into action?"
Mónica:
Hmm. The thing. This answer still seems to be my relationship with my parents and how I sensed that they disappeared into other people's caricatures of them after the 2016 election. That really hit me and hurt me.At first I didn't understand why it would hurt me. I had the tribal allegiances to the left. I was very scared of the candidate who had won. But once I heard it placed on these people I love — whose beliefs confuse and confound me, but I've learned a lot about and can respect in a lot of ways, only through a process of slow and steady learning and a lot of confrontation — it just felt like, wow, we're really not seeing each other, and this can't be good, and it's just getting worse. What am I going to do?Initially the answer was: hide. If people are saying this stuff, just don't participate and go back over there, right? But no.The first stories I carried with me were: what do I do with these? They're not jiving. I don't know where to begin. I'm afraid of how it's going to sound — like I'm defending awful people who made awful choices or whatever. And it was just: I don't know where to start with all this.So then it became — okay, let me get obsessed, which I did and still am, about the question of what keeps us from seeing each other as we really are, and how do we get it out of our way. And so much of it is asking questions when you think you already know. Because you don't. Which isn't to say that there aren't real things to be really afraid of. It's just we have to open our eyes wider to discern what's overwrought from what is really true. And then you gain more confidence about what's really true, and you can act on it with that confidence, which is really empowering.It started with my parents, but it's become everybody — folks on the left and on the right, folks who are older and younger, this race and that race. Name your difference. We are blinded by our assumptions all the time. And it just became this fire in me. Writing the book I wrote was the hardest thing I'd ever done, but I had to try.
Jessica:
I heard a little jingle in the background. Do you want to show who it is?
Mónica:
Okay, hang on tight. Special guest. This is Zuko.For our audio listeners, I am holding a six-pound fluff named Zuko. He is a Morkie — a mix of a Maltese and a Yorkshire Terrier. He's got the sass and he's got the soothe, and he spends most of his time on somebody's lap because that is who he is and he's a good boy. He was hanging out with me today because my son is watching a tennis tournament and other people are out and about. His jingle was him shaking up.
Jessica:
Good boy. I hog all the Zuko when I'm around. And I laugh that my cat is twice as big — my big one is almost fifteen pounds.
Mónica:
Wow. Zuko is a micro boy. Okay, now I'm getting too gooey.
[01:10:06]
Jessica:
Now that we've got you in a vulnerable spot, we're going to ask you a tough one. This is actually our last question. This is also from John in Pennsylvania — we're going back to history again. "If a Patriot colonist asks you, 'How can you even think about talking with our Loyalist neighbors after X happened?' — what do you answer?"
Mónica:
The Boston Massacre, the Tea Party. Right.Boy, that is a really good one. None of us were around back then, obviously.Back then, there were moments where it was extremely dangerous in certain parts of the colonies to hang out with Loyalists. So we have to account for the fact that the environment conditions a sense of actual physical danger. Sometimes you just don't have the choice, and if you're caught, that could really hurt you. We're not there yet in America. I hope not. We're not there yet. Psychologically, it can feel like we are — but there's no actual open, violent war all over the place. Thank goodness for that.So when that is the case, relationships continue to matter, even during conflict — maybe especially during conflict. That's when the magic can sometimes happen. That's when certain things can be transformed. That's where you can avoid some of the costliest parts of ruptures.Relationships happening during conflict are the most incredible vector for persuasion. It could be that you're talking to the Loyalist, and the Loyalist is still talking to you, and the Loyalist goes, "You know, I think you're right, and I think I have to make some drastic changes to join your cause." That can't happen if you don't have the relationship.
Jessica:
If you slammed the door on that, right.
Mónica:
Then that slams the door on the possibility of people changing nonviolently on their own, because they've come to see things your way. Also, just generally — don't assume that relationships are a distraction from justice. That can be the way justice gets done. That can be the way your movement grows.Also, war is not forever. If you feel like there is a big battle now and you want to sever your relationships with everyone on the other side of it — those relationships may have meaning once things settle down. And just keep searching for peaceful alternatives. You have your side, they have theirs. You can meet somewhere, and maybe figure something out, and take it back to your people, and the conflict gets a little softer somehow.Depending on where you were in the loyalist and revolutionary times, you would have had to be very, very careful. But I think if I were there, I would at least try to make the argument: "Look, you want me to keep this relationship. You do. I think you do." Because this is where we can learn what the opposition is really thinking, and where we can check our own assumptions about what the disagreement is even really about.But again, not to be too Pollyannish — you don't want to do something that's going to put you in mortal danger by association.
Jessica:
Definitely not. I do think there's a good point to be made about — you might be imagining it's bigger and scarier than it is. And the only way, again this is the theme of this episode, is to reach out to the human who disagrees with you.
Mónica:
Yeah, because it will transform. I keep coming back to that word. You may think that something can only possibly look like this to you, but talk to other people. Don't be afraid of it, and they'll add dimensionality to what you're seeing, and you'll do the same for them, and everything can look different.And I'd also say — I would hope our political leaders never stop trying to avoid open war and conflict. I expect that of them. Well, then I can do it too.And going back to those conflict entrepreneurs, right? They want us to believe it's black and white and we're good and they're bad. So I think it is resisting that messaging and bringing in the complexity. And that's hard.
Jessica:
We love complexity.
Mónica:
We love it. D- Zuko, do you love complexity? Zuko does not like complexity. Zuko's like, "I just wanna sleep and rest in your arms forever." Leave the complexity to the humans.
[01:16:45]
Jessica:
We did it! But we don't want this to be over — please do send in more questions, more concerns, more stories of wins.
Mónica:
Yes. That email again is abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com. Use it. It's there for you.
Jessica:
Join the text line. What's that number again, Mónica?
Mónica:
That number is 206-926-9955. Text the word "brave" to that number. Thank you.
Jessica:
Our exclusive club.
Mónica:
All are welcome. That's right, always has its doors open. And yeah, we really don't want this to be the last one, so please do send your questions. There's so much to talk about. And none of these are final answers. Ever.
Jessica:
It's an ongoing conversation.
Mónica:
That's right. All right. Bye, my friend.
Jessica:
Bye!
Mónica:
Bye.
(music up)
