a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not a square

In the 1950's, we had vision, we built the interstate highway system, linking all our states together. It has a total length of 46,876 miles (75,440 km),^[1] making it both the largest highway system in the world and the largest public works project in history.  The distribution of virtually all goods and services involves Interstate Highways at some point.^[5]Our government did this to benefit everyone all across America. 

The highest tax rate back then was 90% and the rich anted up.  Many today would say it was to their detriment but was it?  

No.

Have you ever considered how many companies all across this nation have benefitted financially from the use of those roads.  Interstate commerce exploded, without those highways most companies would never have grown as large as they have. 

One thing never considered in the tax cutting mania is how our infrastructure has suffered.   All across the country roads, bridges, rail lines, airports, sewers and water systems etc. need repair to keep us competitive with China which has built 40 high speed rail lines to our one in California.  China is investing in its future while we let everything rot and fail to plan for ours.

Today, we don't want our taxes to raise because we are short sighted.  We don't see Universal Health Care, high speed rail transit or anything else as being beneficial to all companies that compete against each other.  We don't see a healthy workforce as one that can keep our economy competitive with others around the world.  We don't see investment in infrastructure as a positive, instead we fight to keep the nation at a disadvantage.

This is what I think but many on the other side of the aisle disagree with me. 

So.

How do we talk to those that don't agree with us, how do we use empathy to communicate?

Would some form of nonviolent communication allow us all to further discussion even in times where the hatred is palatable?

We all have the inclination to defend ourselves, withdraw from communication, or attack when we perceive we have been criticized or wronged.  This happens daily in our political discourse and our failure to listen to any side.  Winning no longer means wining the argument it means damaging the country, damaging the family, damaging our troops, and increasing taxes. 

The offender who delivered the criticism may have been direct or shrouded his criticism in language meant to disguise the attack.  Nevertheless, it was delivered and it was unwelcome.  But was our reaction to this unwelcome exchange one that could further understanding or end it?

Today the conversation ends far too frequently without any resolution.

I've been reading a lot about nonviolent communication and the use of empathy to diffuse situations that could develop into violent outcomes.  The thing to remember is that empathy does not mean sympathy, empathy is trying to understand the other person or the other side and their feelings.  You don't have to agree or disagree with them you just have to try and understand. 

Today understanding the other side is lacking and the divisiveness is getting nastier and nastier.
                                           
Marshall B. Rosenburg works all over the world to train and educate people on the benefits of non violent communication.  His website http://www.cnvc.org goes into much more detail about the methods he uses and how to get training.  While examining his site i came across the use of four words that are key to keeping the lines of communication open.

The first word, observation, is something we all do when we communicate.  Each of us observes the other to try and understand them without actually evaluating or judging them.  From that first observation we move on to how we feel about the interchange.  Did it make us angry, happy or a host of other feelings we need to recognize before we proceed.  The third word is need and how our needs have been affected by the other persons discourse.  With the fourth word being request.

What is it we want done?  What is it we want that would change things?

These four words, observation, feeling, needs and request can be used in both directions.  You can use it to get your needs acknowledged or you can use it to acknowledge the needs of someone else that you may have been misunderstanding.  The four words are so easy to remember that the time it takes to activate them in your mind can make the difference between an uncomfortable encounter and a really positive one.

But now I'm getting back to the tax issue.  Both sides of the political animal, that we call our government, act to the detriment of the nation as a whole.  Today there is gridlock in Congress.   We have two wars draining the tax base, we have unemployed people draining the tax base, we have corporate welfare and regular welfare, medicaid etc. draining the tax base, along with a host of other departments draining the tax base. Nothing gets done, neither side can move their reforms forward.  So how would non violent communication change the dynamics in Congress?

Who knows but something has to give or we will jettison this whole country into third world status real soon.

I cut and pasted these 10 simple steps from the non violent communication website.


These methods can be used in all types of environments from the home, the work place, politics to international disputes.

The most simple tactic in communicating is listening first to what the other person is trying to express.  We need both sides to listen to the needs of the other side.  It can't be a lopsided endevor with one side trying and the other side grandstanding.  Both sides have to be willing to come to the table in good faith.

If we can do that with our Conservative and Liberal friends maybe it can happen in Congress too.

We can try out Rosenburg's list in our daily lives.  Try it in your living room.  Try it with your friends that don't agree with you.  If we can do it, our representatives in government can too.


(1) Spend some time each day quietly reflecting on how we would like to relate to ourselves and others.

(2) Remember that all human beings have the same needs.

(3) Check our intention to see if we are as interested in others getting their needs met as our own.

(4) When asking someone to do something, check first to see if we are making a request or a demand.

(5) Instead of saying what we DON'T want someone to do, say what we DO want the person to do.

(6) Instead of saying what we want someone to BE, say what action we'd like the person to take that we hope will help the person be that way.

(7) Before agreeing or disagreeing with anyone's opinions, try to tune in to what the person is feeling and needing.

(8) Instead of saying "No," say what need of ours prevents us from saying "Yes."

(9) If we are feeling upset, think about what need of ours is not being met, and what we could do to meet it, instead of thinking about what's wrong with others or ourselves.

(10) Instead of praising someone who did something we like, express our gratitude by telling the person what need of ours that action met.

The Center for Nonviolent Communication (CNVC) would like there to be a critical mass of people using Nonviolent Communication language so all people will get their needs met and resolve their conflicts peacefully.
2001, revised 2004 Gary Baran & CNVC. The right to freely duplicate this document is hereby granted.