Schismogenesis in Local Politics

Understanding and addressing the creation of division

It’s election time all around the country and here in Boulder, we have 10 candidates running for 4 open city council positions and 4 candidates running to be Boulder’s first directly elected mayor. I am one of those candidates running for city council which has enabled me an on-the-ground view of how we’re doing politics in Boulder. From my view, there’s a lot we’re doing right here, but also a lot of room for growth. And one of these areas where I think growth is needed is around having nuanced conversations that enable voters and candidates to get to know each other and to foster relationships that will enable effective collaboration going forward.

It’s useful to start this conversation with an exploration of what gets in the way of us working together. This is not an issue unique to Boulder, not even unique to America. Human beings historically have been challenged in effectively cooperating with each other. That’s not true at all levels of course, we’re inherently cooperative beings and in order to survive we’ve had to work together. But we are rarely inclusive in looking to collaborate. Typically, we define “our” group and work with them, but we refuse to work with groups we label as the “other” and more often than not, actively work against “them”. Why is that?

Let’s take a look at a term coined by anthropologist Gregory Bateson in the 1930s: schismogenesis. This term translates to “creation of division” and was originally used to describe how neighboring groups would tend toward opposite behaviors and beliefs in developing their cultural structures. In this modern age of connectivity, geography is not always the primary factor in this process, since ideological differences are more dangerous and prevalent today as a threat to world stability.  The process itself is natural; we can't navigate the world we find ourselves in without distinguishing ourselves from the objects and creatures around us. Where the problems start is when this process is taken to the extreme, as with beliefs, where exclusion occurs and beliefs justify violence against those labeled as 'different'. Schismogenesis in larger groups, such as nations, leads to conflict which, in this modern age, could end life as we know it. This is a serious distortion of a process that is beneficial when applied in the appropriate contexts.

Moving Beyond Polarity

If we want to foster a culture in Boulder and beyond that actually addresses the issues affecting us all, it’s vital we learn to work together, and that means being careful not to fall into this pattern of creating division. This has to start in our political environment. In most of the country, the divide is between democrat and republican, while in Boulder, we have our own form of division. Boulder politics is strongly influenced by groups such as “PLAN Boulder” and “Boulder Elevated” and other groups such as “Better Boulder” and “Boulder Progressives”. These groups typically define their divisions around differences in approaches to growth and to homelessness, among other issues. While each of these groups works to contribute to our city in meaningful ways and fosters engagement in the political process, it’s important that we be careful of the traps of thought here. We have to be careful not to fall into patterns of thinking and behavior where our differences become excuses to create conflict rather than progress. We also have to be mindful that we don’t use the information shared from these groups as an excuse to stop thinking and investigating the issues as individuals. Getting to know the candidates as individuals, as well as the issues, will create an intelligent and informed voting body, which can lead to actual change for the better in our city.

It’s worth looking a bit deeper at how we come to make decisions. We rarely question our own biases, and we assume the correctness of our own viewpoint without understanding where it comes from. Without understanding this trap of thought, we will typically look for what validates our view point, which leads us to seek agreement more than understanding. We can see this demonstrated in many of the candidate forums, where most of the questions seek less to assess a candidate's capacity to think critically, to navigate conflict, and to hold meaningful values; important qualifications for any public representative; but rather these questions seek to reduce values down to view points to seek candidates who agree with us. The frequent bouts of yes and no questions at these forums, that don’t allow for a nuanced answer of extremely complex questions, are a clear indicator of this tendency.

We all have to be mindful of this tendency. One of the hot issues this year is ballot measure 302, Safe Zones 4 Kids. This issue is one that tends to draw clear lines between these two camps in Boulder politics, the “progressives” and “conservatives”. For much of this election, being more in the “progressive” camp and mostly only hearing those viewpoints, I had been opposing 302, but I hadn’t really taken the time to get to know it, to understand the specific language and to hear the arguments for supporting it. Once I took the time to have deeper conversations with fellow candidates who supported it and looked to understand it for myself, I came to a place of almost abstaining before finally deciding to still vote no, but it was a “No” with much greater nuance that could more clearly recognize the important values being expressed by those who opposed it. Another of my candidate friends is voting yes, but has also taken the time to hear many perspectives and while our votes are different, we seem to be holding very similar views and values within this. And that’s something we wouldn’t discover if we weren’t willing to see beyond the polarities and look together.

Starting Near, Starting Here

If we wish to address these problems, and foster a culture that is able to look inclusively and to hold the necessary complexity, we have to start by looking to understand ourselves. It’s vital that we cultivate within us the capacity to recognize our own biases and the biases of our culture. Honest and open inquiry is essential if we want to facilitate the kind of understanding that will truly move us forward. Understanding ourselves requires moving beyond just what we want to be, our own personal ideals and dogmas, and relating directly with what is. If we can’t see how connected we all are, we will continue to focus on our differences and our very survival on this planet will continue to be in threat.

These problems are visible at a local level but it shouldn’t be hard to see the ways we create this division throughout our human society. These days, so many of us are feeling the pain of the conflict in the middle east in which so many fellow humans are suffering, and also likely feeling the frustration at our inability to actually move towards peace. While the conflict in the middle east is on a level of magnitude that is far greater than what we are experiencing here, I think a common root can be found as we look to explore the nature of conflict and our human tendency to drive ourselves further and further apart from each other, tending towards extremes while being ignorant to what we share in common. I don’t have any answers to how we solve what is happening in the middle east, but I think if we’re genuinely interested in finding peace, we have to start by creating it where we are.

Let’s come together and see about actually addressing these problems. It’s up to each of us to look to understand ourselves and question our own biases. We can all do more to keep an open mind to differing viewpoints and actively work to build relationships beyond our usual spheres of agreements. We share so much in common, and here in Boulder, the truth of that is so evident to me. Through this election I have come to know a great many people, from councilors to candidates to every-day community members who care greatly about what is happening in our city and want to help it to thrive. None of us are perfect and none of us have the right view or the right approach all the time, but that’s why it’s so necessary for us to come together. Through leaning into the difficult conversations, and actively supporting each other as well as challenging each other, we can all grow together and effectively collaborate to build a city and society that works for all.