I live in likely the strongest liberal bubble in the country – San Francisco. As a result, it is very rare that I encounter someone in my daily life with political views that are in direct opposition to mine. The political debates around me are between the liberal, really liberal and really really liberal – who still all agree on the vast majority of issues. As someone who is exceptionally conflict averse, I recognize that the absence of what I see as uncomfortable confrontations is both an incredible privilege and not the experience of much of America. In an effort to continually learn about our country and work toward a sane future, I’m diving into the deep end and learning how to have these conversations productively – even if they aren’t ever comfortable.
How am I doing this?
I joined the most recent cohort of Unfortunately Not a Sound Bath – a listening club that’s been getting a lot of attention lately, including a recent feature in The New York Times. Here’s the premise: we listen to right-wing media not to criticize or slam it, but to actually understand the communication tactics being used – and then apply those lessons to how we communicate on the left.
And, let me tell you. It is hard. I have to listen to the assignments on 1.5x speed to be able to get through them without going into a full on panic attack. I get the majority of my news from NPR (subscriber to two stations), The New York Times, and The San Francisco Chronicle. Why would I willingly subject myself to content that makes my blood pressure spike? Because understanding how the other side talks, what resonates with their audiences, and how they frame issues isn’t about agreeing with them. It’s about getting smarter about how we show up in conversations – especially the hard ones with people we care about who see things differently.
It turns out there’s actual science backing this up. This recent piece in the Times breaks down what research tells us about productive disagreement – and spoiler alert: most of us are doing it wrong. The key isn’t winning the argument, it’s creating opportunity for actual understanding.
I’m also drawing inspiration from this piece about talking to friends who “aren’t paying attention” to politics right now. It’s a reminder that productive conversations aren’t about winning arguments – they’re about staying connected to people and helping them see why any of this matters in the first place.
I’ve already learned a lot. For instance, the right is not a monolith – there are real differences of opinion, just like on the left. America First and Trump First coalitions have genuinely different views on Iran, which means there’s actually room for productive conversation about foreign policy. Who knew?
I’m also realizing that not every conversation needs to be explicitly about politics to influence politics. If the right can use a review of the new Wuthering Heights movie to reinforce tenets of Christian Nationalism (yes, really), then we can absolutely use cultural touchpoints to reinforce our values too.
And here’s the thing I keep coming back to: I can easily understand why the right has been so successful at messaging. They package tough ideas in bite-sized, repeatable nuggets – sometimes in the most unexpected places. Meanwhile, we’re over here writing monologues and policy theses. What if we just said things simply and said them again? And again?
So here’s my commitment
I’m going to keep showing up for these uncomfortable conversations. I’m going to listen more than I want to. And I’m going to keep reporting back on what I’m learning – because if we’re going to do something about democracy, we need to be able to talk to people beyond our bubble, even when (especially when) it’s hard.
Who’s with me?
If you’re interested in joining UNASB, currently accepting new members into our 5th (!!) cohort starting in April. Sign up here!
____
Follow Sheila at: https://dosomethinganything.substack.com/
 | A guest post by
|
Great column and I have already re-posted it on one Substack about the importance of interacting with others who disagree with you politically and another Substack talking about polarization in America. Your essay reminded me that we’re taught how to do math and how to read and write English, but not how to “read” people—social cues, emotions, or difficult conversations. That’s a skill we largely learn the 'hard' way. I still learn as an older America on how to listen, take criticism and respond in a civil and constructive manner. I am lucky jobs where interpersonal skills are compulsory. For example, having knocked on 40,000 doors as a former elected official (6 elections), and served in a legislature, I interacted daily with people who disagreed, opposed me, and funded my opponents. Some even used antisemitic tropes. You learn to listen, absorb, and respond without (or trying not to) escalating. One difference: I didn’t face the level of threats that are far too common today, in society and in politics. As a plug for @UNASB, their effort is excellent.