There exists today an obsession with identity that seeks to ground the individual in a few characteristics (e.g. straight, gay, white, black, male, female, left, right, etc.) While politics often serves as the theatre for the modern tribal warfare this form of compartmentalized thinking fuels, this phenomenon can also be found in religion, nations, and graduate school classrooms. However pervasive this phenomenon, it is not as pervasive as the presupposition of these identities. The categories we put on like name tags (or use for name calling) all hang on our common humanity.

Marshall Rosenberg provides a model for communication that works against the violence of tribalism by creating a stance toward the other that acknowledges the basic human categories of feelings and needs without passing judgement. Nonviolent communication seeks a compassionate stance towards others, by emphasizing understanding. I find the model to be a breath of fresh air that instills in me a hope for connection in the face of fractionalization. While aspects of nonviolent communication (e.g. observing without evaluating and identifying and taking responsibility for one’s own feelings) are without doubt difficult to engage, I believe them to be enriching practices that work honor, dignity, and connectedness.

Over the coming weeks I will engage in discourse with my fellow classmates. As I engage in discourse, I commit to work against totalizing my colleagues by viewing them exclusively according to categories. Instead I commit to emphasizing our common humanity. Practically speaking, I commit to engaging my colleagues humanity through the methodology of nonviolent communication, seeking to refrain from judgement in my observations. I will work to understand their feelings and needs and engage requests as my humanity allows. As discourse is bidirectional, I also commit to sharing my observations, making my feelings and needs known, and making requests of my colleagues as is beneficial to our common humanity. When I fail I commit to realignment with nonviolent communication principles. When I am failed, I commit to not passing judgement and maintaining peaceful engagement. I commit to a stance of compassion that seeks connection.

References

Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure. New York, NY: Penguin Press. Rosenberg, M. B. (2015). Nonviolent communication: A language of life. Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.