Dialogue Across Difference

Differing perspectives are a central feature of democracy, and building bridges across our differences for the common good has been a perpetual goal. However, too often in the history of the United States, compromise has meant denial of equality for Black and Indigenous people, other communities of color, and groups who were historically excluded. Recognizing that centuries of injustices have characterized our nation, bridging initiatives today must also center the ideals of inclusivity and expanding democracy.

The skills to dialogue across our differences are essential for liberatory learning and collective action in our communities. Unlike debate – in which opposing perspectives on a topic are defended to convince others of a particular viewpoint – dialogue is a joint effort that honors participants’ diverse experiences and perspectives. The heart of dialogue is not in speaking to convince but rather in active listening and questioning to understand one another. Educator and philosopher Paulo Freire aptly points out, “Dialogue … requires an intense faith in humankind, faith in their power to make and remake, to create and re create, faith in their vocation to be more fully human (which is not the privilege of an elite, but the birthright of all).”

Difference does not solely occur across the political aisle but also within our own in-groups. Identities and experiences determine our positionality to social issues and ideas. Therefore, it is equally important to have dialogue about differences with an ally to better understand how we can jointly address a problem. Combined, intra- and intergroup dialogue helps people to recognize the interconnections necessary for understanding through dialectical thinking, holding contradictory ideas and multiple perspectives.

Polarization Harms Society

The impact of polarization reverberates across the nation. Consider the following data compiled by the Listen First Project:

32% say division has made it difficult to get along with friends or family. (Ipsos) 

80% of partisans believe that the other party “poses a threat that if not stopped will destroy America as we know it.” (NBC News) 

66% say when discussing issues with those with whom they disagree, people are “quick to attack them.” Only 24% say people are “quick to listen.” (Listen First Project)

53% say the political system is too divided to solve the nation’s problems. (New York Times) 

To build an inclusive society, we must move beyond the structures that silo and limit us. A significant challenge, however, is the current political and social polarization – the increasing divisive movement away from the center – which can affect our ability to dialogue across difference, understand others and be inclusive in our approach.

Young people bring a vital element to the table in approaching difficult topics: their curiosity. They are still developing an understanding of the world and how they fit within their local, national and global communities; therefore, they need a broad appreciation of social issues. However, hyper-polarization is the only context many young people today have ever known. And that hyper-polarization has affected the education landscape, with politically motivated undemocratic positions – such as anti-LGBTQ+ policies, book bans and “divisive concepts” legislation – that limit learning and young people’s ability to navigate and thrive in a complex world.

During the past few years, at least 44 states have introduced legislation targeting what have been termed “divisive concepts” or other aspects of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). These policies consistently attack education through curricular restrictions and teacher education program censorship. And anti-inclusive legislative efforts have created hostile environments for targeted groups, such as transgender and nonbinary youth and their families. These policies demonstrate the increasing divide between groups in the U.S. and the agenda of those who desperately wish to cling to power even at the expense of our democracy.

Due to increasing polarization across our nation – and local communities – people are hesitant to engage in difficult conversations. “Social issues are embedded within a (relatively new) fractured context – politically polarized and deeply divided along lines of race and class,” notes Paula McAvoy, an education professor and researcher at North Carolina State University who focuses on the relationship between schools and democratic society. The effect of polarization is compounded when thinking of close friends and family who have opposing views.

Further, most people work and socialize mainly with those who share their perspective, thus yielding ideas that are more uncompromising. This reality makes us believe that “others” who do not agree with us are unreasonable, further shaping people’s choices in a perpetual cycle. To combat the perception gap phenomenon, author and bridge-builder Mónica Guzmán asks, “Am I making an informed decision or an uninformed assumption?” The echo chambers that we find ourselves mired in can lead us to vilify those seen as “the other,” and social media algorithms exacerbate these echo chambers, thereby stoking the fires that divide us. Guzmán further points out that “whoever is underrepresented in your life will be overrepresented in your imagination.”

The pattern continues in young people who are influenced by peers and adults caught in the unceasing rhythm. Young people are also often exposed to hyper-polarization online, including extremist content. For example, social media algorithms can prevent people from seeing more than one perspective on a topic. In turn, young people may be less likely to voice their thinking on important topics, especially if it goes against the grain of the group.

Dialogue Is Foundational to Democracy 

The heart of dialogue is not in speaking to convince but rather in active listening and questioning to understand one another.

Walter Parker, professor of education at the University of Washington, defines discussion as “a kind of shared inquiry, the desired outcomes of which rely on the expression and consideration of diverse views.” Entering into shared inquiry with others who hold different identities, backgrounds, perspectives and experiences provides an intentional opportunity to develop understanding, thereby opening ourselves to listening with the mutual goal of learning. Dialogue across difference is not simply for one person to change their beliefs; instead, dialogue focuses on growth and progress through newfound understanding of others. Freire explains this goal, stating: “It is not our role to speak to the people about our own view of the world, nor to attempt to impose that view on them, but rather to dialogue with the people about their view and ours. We must realize that their view of the world, manifested variously in their action, reflects their situation in the world.”

Understanding of differences should encourage appreciation of diversity, “a central feature of social justice,” as scholar Lee Anne Bell pointed out in the article “What Is Social Justice Education?” It is important to note that differences in power dynamics and structural hierarchies cannot be ignored as we seek to understand one another. Bell further explains: “Oppression is created and kept alive through hierarchies that rank groups in ways that give power, social and economic advantages, and institutional and cultural validity to some groups over others. Challenging hierarchy requires confronting the ideological frameworks, historical legacies, and institutional patterns and practices that unequally structure social relations.” The reality of these unequal structures and the history of injustice needs to be integral to the consideration of how we engage in and facilitate dialogue.

Dialogue is foundational for the democratic process and serves as a marker of “intrinsic equality” or the assumption that the good of all human beings is fundamentally equal, according to political scientist Robert A. Dahl. Within groups, learning and consensus-building can lead to stronger decisions because, as political scientist Diana Mutz points out, it familiarizes them with legitimate rationales of opposing views, and it normalizes political difference as part of the democratic process. In short, political tolerance is about the ways that people agree to disagree. However, understanding that there are political differences does not mean acceptance of injustice nor validation of hate and bias. Dialogue skills address differences in direct and respectful ways, centering the ability to engage in and facilitate difficult conversations and handle conflict.

Educating for Democracy

Dialogue across difference and on critical topics allows conversations around issues of injustice in our society. Recognizing that young people want to talk about difficult issues in society is critical. In fact, it provides an opportunity to see young people come alive with engagement as they consider deep questions about the world in which they live. Having dialogue engages people with the stories of others as they listen and learn about different experiences, fostering emotional connections.

Diana Hess, professor and chair of education at University of Wisconsin Madison, explains that democratic education “honestly addresses the political world outside of school and represents that political realm as dynamic, thereby emphasizing the ongoing transformation of society.” Successful unpacking of complex issues in society – such as understanding the structures and impact of race and racism in the U.S. – and working toward justice requires drawing on historical and contemporary contexts. But complex issues are often oversimplified in polarized settings. Masking complex concepts in two-dimensional ways can make it difficult to recognize or consider how these issues impact diverse individuals or groups in different ways.

Ashraf Esmail, director of the Center for Racial Justice at Dillard University, recognizes the importance of democratic education. Esmail puts students in charge of developing questions for learning forums and other center activities because it encourages them to make connections and develop relationships that are central to life in a democratic society. Students work on project topics that include real-world social issues that they can think about over time as they seek to better their communities by tackling injustice.

Asking authentic questions centers our humanity as we seek to learn about new topics and people. Guzmán affirms the need to approach conversations about difficult topics with such curiosity. Instead of asking “why” someone holds a particular belief or stance, ask “how did they come to this viewpoint?” This rephrasing presents an opportunity for explaining reasoning, which may be a fresh insight for consideration, especially if based on something that does not directly pertain to you. And a shift in focus may also allow you to answer, “What am I missing?” – which Guzmán points out can change the way we think about our own beliefs in concert with those of others when we treat the discussion as a tour rather than a trial.

Our identities and experiences can create biases that we may not recognize. While most people would agree with the need for equality and tend to see their actions as contributing to equality in society, sometimes their actions do not align with social justice. As we work toward the ability to dialogue across our differences, consider assuming the good intentions of learners rather than approaching from a standpoint of judgment. In addition, people often prioritize intent over impact and may not intend harm. By engaging with the impact of a scenario, people can see how impact may not align with the intentions and cause harm. Helping learners understand impact and intent can shift the priority to considering the impact of actions.

Dialogue and Growth

“Dialogue … requires an intense faith in humankind, faith in their power to make and remake, to create and re-create, faith in their vocation to be more fully human (which is not the privilege of an elite, but the birthright of all).” 
– Paulo Freire

Nothing grows by remaining in a comfort zone; learning occurs when we uncover information that is new to us. Social issues can challenge deeply rooted beliefs and perspectives that are closely tied to our identities, experiences and backgrounds. And dialogue across difference can move us beyond our silos and comfort zones. When we are presented with information or perspectives that run contrary to our own, it is important that we step back and embrace the discomfort of engaging in conversations that might be difficult. If we lean into this discomfort through curiosity, growth is more likely to happen.

Bridging programs and dialogue initiatives are being developed on university campuses. And these projects hold immense potential for communities. Popular education is a process of helping people realize their power to take control of their own learning to confront injustice. This concept, developed by Freire, extends beyond education in schools to include community models and can increase capacity and confidence for democratic participation. And dialogue skills can build foundational capacities for community education and collective action. Freire encourages us with words that are fitting during these polarized times and as we seek to strengthen our democracy: “The dehumanization resulting from an unjust order is not a cause for despair but for hope, leading to the incessant pursuit of the humanity denied by injustice.”