Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Building Bridges and Combating Toxic Polarization_Presentation.pptx
Similar to Building Bridges and Combating Toxic Polarization_Presentation.pptx (20)
More from RILearn
More from RILearn (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Building Bridges and Combating Toxic Polarization_Presentation.pptx
- 1. Building Bridges and Combating Toxic Polarization Tabatha Pilgrim Thompson The Horizons Project Rebecca Crall Rotary International Rotary International Convention Houston, Texas June 6, 2022
- 2. Why are we having this conversation within Rotary? ● Not all polarization is bad. However, toxic polarization is a rising issue within the Rotary family. ● Vision: Together, we see a world where people unite and take action to create lasting change — across the globe, in our communities, and in ourselves. ● Mission: We provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through our fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders.
- 3. How does identity come into play when we talk about polarization? ● Go to www.menti.com and type in the code 3923 4841. ● Results…
- 5. How would you describe “polarization” in your community? ● Go to www.menti.com and type in the code 3923 4841. ● Results…
- 7. ● Toxic polarization is categorically different from healthy or good polarization. ○ Affective polarization: When groups aren’t simply in disagreement with each other, but actively dislike and even dehumanize each other. ○ Perceptual polarization: Measures the degree to which we view the other side as extreme in comparison to our own. Toxic polarization: A state of intense, chronic polarization – marked by high levels of loyalty to a person’s ingroup and contempt or even hate for outgroups.
- 8. What can toxic polarization look like in your community? ● Dehumanizing rhetoric ● Binary thinking, excessive “othering” ● Condoning physical violence ● Zero-sum, scarcity mindset ● Groupthink and herd mentality ● Social and political homogeneity ● Not separating people from the problem ● Over-reliance on rational arguments ● Exaggerating difference ● Ignoring power dynamics
- 9. The good news… ● We aren’t as far apart as we think. ● We can activate cross-cutting identities to bring us back. ● Tools like dialogue paired with collective action can help us find common ground.
- 10. ?
- 11. ● How is polarization showing up in your community? Is it good or toxic? ● What strategies are you using to address it? Discussion in Pairs
- 12. ● What was a key takeaway from your pairs or Zoom discussion? ○ Go to www.menti.com and type in the code 1506 0476. ● Have additional questions? Email us at: tabatha@horizonsproject.us rebecca.crall@rotary.org
Editor's Notes
- Rebecca to add notes
- Unpack slide: Read a few identities Was this hard for you? How might your answer have changed when you go back home and engage in your community? (provide personal example: Facilitator (here); Peacebuilder and organizer (work); Daughter, sister, mother (home)) Identity makes up who you are. When pieces of our identity are threatened or pushed down, our common reaction is to hold on to that identity stronger.
- The same can be said when we form larger social identities in groups–whether it’s within communities of faith, sports, race, political parties, professions, geographies. “Social identity refers to our sense of who we are based on our group membership/s and it is a powerful source of individual pride and self-esteem.” (Over Zero) Let’s watch this short video from our friends at Over Zero to learn a little bit more about identity and how it can contribute to AND mitigate violent conflict.
- IF VIDEO DOES NOT WORK The same can be said when we form larger social identities in groups–whether it’s within communities of faith, sports, race, political parties, professions, geographies. “Social identity refers to our sense of who we are based on our group membership/s and it is a powerful source of individual pride and self-esteem.” (Over Zero) We are designed to gravitate towards the safety, security, and identity of our group (tied to our innate survival instincts). In doing so, we can sometimes exaggerate differences with other groups. So, when our group comes under threat, we can feel our very being is coming under threat.
- Unpack results and tee up later conversation on good and toxic polarization
- So how does identity tie to polarization? Quaker activist and trainer George Lakey compares polarization to “a blacksmith’s forge,” one that heats up society and makes norms and institutions malleable and more susceptible to change. Change is constant (Heraclitus). So polarization itself isn’t good or bad, but it can turn toxic and lead to violent conflict if it is not managed constructively as a society goes through change together. If people don’t see themselves or their groups in the change, then they may perceive that their identity is under threat, consolidate within their in-groups and adopt an “us vs. them mentality,” increasing the likelihood for dehumanization and othering.
- Affective polarization: Here, outgroup members are seen to pose a threat not only to ideas and values, but to identities and social groups.
- Dehumanizing rhetoric: identifying groups of people as subhuman, backwards or dangerous enemies (ex. referring to immigrants as criminals; protestors as thugs; ultra-religious as backwards) Binary thinking, excessive “othering”: putting people in categories of Black vs. White, Republican vs. Democrat; monolithic characterizations of “the other” that lack nuance; other side is too extreme, too stupid, or incapable of understanding or changing. Our side, meanwhile, is all-knowing and always right. Condoning violence: suggesting that violence is acceptable to advance political goals; advocating violence against enemies Zero-sum, scarcity mindset: believing that gains for one side must entail losses for the other side; there are not enough resources for everyone (ex. progress for historically marginalized populations must necessarily entail loss for historically privileged populations.) Groupthink and herd mentality: rejecting dissenting views within one’s own ingroup; ostracizing those who do not agree with all parts of a political platform Social and political homogeneity: reading and listening only to those you agree with; homogenous social and community interactions Not separating the people from the problem: excessive targeting of individuals rather than systems that are oppressive and causing harm for all Over-reliance on rational arguments: seeking to convince people of the rightness of your cause with arguments and statistics rather than starting with common values, personal stories or experiences Exaggerating difference: emphasizing differences rather than commonalities; deemphasizing points of agreement Ignoring power dynamics: targeting individuals and groups rather than systems that perpetuate injustices and collective harm
- Meta-perceptions: We tend to believe we are further apart than we actually are, which can lead to further toxic polarization and dehumanization. Cross-cutting identities: Important opportunity for Rotary–tie back to Rebecca’s talk, Rotary’s mission, and participants’ identity as Rotarians. Bridge-building + action: Taking the time to talk to and understand members of the out-group can correct misperceptions and help you find common ground to take action on together.