Toxic polarization and how not to be part of the problem

There’s polarization, and then there’s toxic polarization. We all know what that feels like, especially at this moment around Israel and Palestine. For many of us, the temperature of the rhetoric is so incendiary that even though we might have deep and nuanced feelings, let alone education, experience, or personal ties to the issue, the thought of wading into what seems like a totally polarized conversation feels frightening and pointless. But, we still want to be able to engage in our world, and maybe even dip our toe into conversation with people we believe to be well-intentioned, even if their views might seem extreme or uninformed to us. But how can we do that without turning up the temperature and the volume by adding our voice? 

Thankfully, Rabbi Rachel Schmelkin is here to help. Rabbi Schmelkin specializes in navigating toxic polarization and crossing divides. In this episode, she helps us understand what’s happening to people–including ourselves–when we encounter or engage in polarized or potentially polarizing topics, and reminds us that we have choices in how–and if–we engage.

TERMS: 

Havdalah: Hebrew for “separation”, the Havdalah service marks the end of Shabbat and the return to the "normal" week.

Rabbinate: The office or function of being a rabbi

Motive misattribution: Assuming that the motivations of others are negative in a situation where we would accept our own motives as perfectly reasonable. This is related to motive asymmetry, where people assume the motives of those on the other side of a conflict are diametrically opposed to ours, creating an intractable conflict.

Musar (or Mussar): A movement to use Jewish ethics, as opposed to rules, to guide behavior and character. Mussar facilitators use these principles to guide challenging conversations. 

Sacred Value: A value that is impervious to material incentives to change.

Backfire effect: Digging in on an existing belief in response to information that disproves it.

4-7-8 breathing: a breathing technique to reduce anxiety where one inhales for a count of four, holds the breath for a count of seven, and exhales for a count of eight.

Beginner’s Mind: A mindset that releases any previously existing knowledge or conceptions to allow for maximum curiosity and openness, approaching like a total beginner on the topic.

b'tzelem Elohim: Hebrew for “in the image of God”, it refers to all humans being created in the image of God and therefore being of equal value.

ken y'hi ratzon: Translated as “let it be so”, it literally means “let it be God’s will”

MORE:
One America Movement: https://oneamericamovement.org/ 
*Quick disclosure: The One America movement is a catalyst partner of Stand Together, which is my employer in my day job. They have no involvement in this podcast, which does not represent them or their interests in any way. 

Over Zero: https://www.projectoverzero.org/  

Beyond Conflict: https://beyondconflictint.org/ 

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Rabbi Schmelkin: 0:00

Remember that the goal of the conversation is not to change the other person's mind and persuade them to think what you think. Yeah. And if that's why you're doing it, then this probably isn't the right choice

Hannah Gaber: 0:13

Or just prepare for conflict,.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 0:15

Or prepare for conflict, right?

Hannah Gaber: 0:17

Hey, y'all, I don't think it would be unfair to say that many of us are absolutely surrounded by conflict at the moment. For those of us who are lucky enough to be 1000s of miles away from the actual physical conflict in Israel and Gaza, we often find ourselves inundated by rhetoric and images that brings conflict directly into our homes and our hands via our cell phones or conversations that we didn't necessarily volunteer to be a part of. So like many others, I have sought moments of quiet moments of respite. And one of those was a healing and Havdalah service hosted by Washington Hebrew congregation, at a local yoga studio. It seemed like a nice opportunity for me to sit in a dark room with other people who were not going to pick a fight because Rabbi Rachel Shmoocon, who specializes in crossing divides and toxic polarization was leading the gathering. So that seemed like an obvious place to try and process some of what we see around us. And some of what we may start to feel like we want to say ourselves. Needless to say, as soon as the gathering was complete, I approached the poor rabbi and beseeched her for even more of her time and expertise. So without further ado, here is the wise and wonderful Rabbi Rachel Schmelkin. It's been tricky to think about what to say, in all contexts. I was talking with my brother about this just last night, about how it's like you can't just be Jewish, you have to have a stance. And if it's not the exact right stance that agrees with every piece of nuance that someone else's stance takes, then it's like you have to sort of emotionally prepare yourself for like an onslaught. And so it has really felt like, I don't want to say anything at all. And I am sure a lot of people are feeling that way. And yet also feels like I have to say something it I don't know if it's an exterior obligation feeling or an interior obligation feeling. But it feels like saying nothing is as judged or as incriminating, as whatever you could say. But you can never say the right thing anyway.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 2:40

Yep.

Hannah Gaber: 2:41

That's why we have you hear an expert on saying things or not saying things? How did you get the background that you have in de-escalating discourse? And how would you define that concept for us?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 2:54

Sure. So a short version of a much longer story is that I was ordained in 2016. My first congregation out of rabbinical school was congregation, Beth Israel in Charlottesville, Virginia. What that meant was that one year into my rabbinic, I found myself preparing for and counter protesting the unite the right rally. And I spent hours and hours and hours organizing with a very diverse coalition of activists and leaders of faiths leading up to the rally. And during that weekend, and afterwards, as well. And part of the process they went through after experiencing that traumatic and horrifying weekend, was getting involved in an organization called The One America movement, which aims to help people cross religious, racial and political divides, and help people find their shared identities and help people remember that you don't have to agree on everything to sit at the table together. And you don't have to agree on everything to get things done together, either.

Hannah Gaber: 4:17

And you don't have to agree on everything to acknowledge and accept and respect each other's basic shared humanity. Absolutely.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 4:24

Absolutely. And so for me, the really powerful and in some ways, healing part of what happened for me in my involvement in the one America movement in 2018. And 2019, was being in this very small clergy group that included not just more liberal clergy, like myself, but evangelical pastors and a lay leader from the mosque, Christians, Jews and Muslims, an African American pastor and it was... it was was extremely transformative for me both the conversations and the relationships I built, but also the learning I did about toxic polarization, the science behind it, the research that tells us on a lot of issues, we're not as divided as we think we are. And I ended up when it was when it made sense for my husband and I to leave Charlottesville, I ended up working for one American movement for three years before joining the clergy team at Washington Hebrew congregation.

Hannah Gaber: 5:29

Wow. So we connected at the Havdalah and healing that you held over the weekend. And I think one of the fundamental things that came up in the discussions at that group was like, why can't we just accept and acknowledge one another's experience, and, like, everybody's pain is legitimate. So explain, for example, what the most basic understanding of toxic polarization can be. Even in these like small instances of day to day life that we're, I feel like seeing around us more and more.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 6:10

So I think that it's important to start from the foundational idea that there is polarization that exists in the world, and not all polarization is bad, right, we can have a very healthy dialogue and disagreement on an issue that matters. And we see polarization in our world in lots of different ways to that are maybe a little more like light hearted, maybe not for sports, maybe it doesn't feel light hearted for sports fans, from my perspective, right? I root for one team, you, you root for another team. But the problem is that when toxic polarization takes hold, it becomes very tribal, we move into, I'm on this team, and you are on that team. And if you are on the other team, that means X, Y and Z about you. And the people on the other team think the same for us. And then we see something for example, like a bumper sticker, a t shirt, a post on social media from a member of the out group. And then at that moment, we decide we know everything there is to know about that person about where they come from, about their beliefs. And the cycle just gets worse and worse. And the other thing that's happening in the midst of that moment of toxic polarization is that the extreme voices on either side are almost always the loudest.

Hannah Gaber: 7:43

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 7:44

So even though there might be many, many people who think what we think, think what you and I think, right that like, we can sit down and have a conversation and listen to one another's perspectives and have compassion for one another and see each other's pain in this, those aren't the voices that we're hearing most often. That's not the story, that is the sexy story to tell. And so instead, it creates a norm that everyone is super extreme, and everyone is hateful.

Hannah Gaber: 8:19

And it just pushes voices of moderation or compassion out of the room. Because a lot of the time I find that people who are actually pretty interested in like de escalation or a compassionate discourse, don't want to be involved in that type of rhetorical conflict.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 8:38

Right.

Hannah Gaber: 8:39

I was thinking about the Havdalah and healing service? ceremony? I don't really know what to call it, what would we call it gathering?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 8:46

Gathering? I like the word gathering.

Hannah Gaber: 8:47

Yeah, gathering that I met you at, and you set some ground rules right away, which I loved. And you define some terms. And I wonder if I could ask you to do that again here. And what I'm thinking of specifically, is, you know, we're going to start with these questions, and here's why. And also terms that you used, like, I think you said double confidence,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 9:10

Double confidentiality.

Hannah Gaber: 9:12

Double confidentiality.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 9:14

So double confidentiality is, so that's not a science concept that's like different. So there's like the toxic polarization science concepts. And then there's the facilitation training.

Hannah Gaber: 9:22

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 9:23

Work that I've done. And I also have, I've done Musar study, and I've been trained as a Musar facilitator. Musar is a Jewish, a Jewish practice of ethics in which we're thinking about what is on our spiritual curriculum or our sole curriculum. And we are understanding ourselves better and focusing in on particular character traits at particular times and, and doing practices around better understanding and sort of tackling those character traits. All of that is to say that when you're when you're When you're in a Musar, cohort or Musar va'ad, and you're doing this deep work together, one of the things that we always talk about as Musar facilitators is double confidentiality. And it's something it's a step beyond confidentiality, it's not just saying what we say, in this space or in this cohort, or in this conversation, doesn't leave this conversation. It's also saying that, in the context of this space, and time and place and conversation right now, one of us may say something, or share a story or an experience that is really personal, really challenging, maybe very painful, and I want to share it now and talk about it now in this moment and unpack it a little bit right now today. But I don't want to talk about it tomorrow. And so the idea is that just because somebody shared this, you know, wonderful, or terrible experience that they had about, you know, about Israel, the Israeli Palestinian conflict or on birthright or whatever it is. Don't assume that tomorrow when you? I don't know, see them at work? Yeah, that they want to talk about it again. And I would, I would say that, it might be that someone shares an experience with you, you go home, and you think about it, and you do have follow up questions. You want to be delicate when you approach that person again. And it's as simple I think, as saying, when we were in that group together yesterday, you brought up this thing that happened on your birthright trip? On your Israel trip? Or at your synagogue? Or with your brother? Would you be open to talking about it a little bit more? Or do you want to just leave it there? And and letting the person decide?

Hannah Gaber: 11:51

Yeah. I really liked that approach that also feels like a bit of an extension of consent to me.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 11:58

Yeah.

Hannah Gaber: 11:58

And it reminds me of that conversation to have like, you know, just because you guys, maybe were lovers in the past, it does not mean that you're entitled to this person today. You know, it's like consent has to be given every single time. And I think that that goes for conversations. I think that that goes for physical intimacy. I think that that goes for, you know, entering someone's home, you know, just because you've been to my house before you don't get to walk in the door, when you come over, you have to ask. And I think that that's a really respectful way of treating not just a person, but something shared that is vulnerable. I think that's a really lovely way of just saying, you know, hey, that was a different context. Today is today. Can we can I had a question? Are you open to revisiting it? And they can say like, No, thank you. I'll let you know if I am.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 12:47

And I think we can be also, you know, empowered enough to say in a conversation. Yeah. I want to tell you about this.

Hannah Gaber: 12:55

But I don't want to talk about this after this.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 12:57

Yeah, this thing had happened. I hate talking about it. I never talked about it. I really try never to think about it. I want to talk about it today. But please, let's talk about it now. And then let's leave it here.

Hannah Gaber: 13:07

I love that. Yeah. Oh, God, I wish we respected each other's requests for things like that just a little more.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 13:14

Yeah. So how can we, as people in the world be participants in good faith in exchanges using some of these ground rules? Okay, just start start us there. Sure. So one of the things I think is important, especially when we're talking about the Israeli Palestinian conflict, is to recognize that we are talking about an issue that people hold as a sacred value, a sacred value is. So first of all, it's a value that's processed in the part of our brain that processes rule bound behaviors. So we're very rigid about it. And what that means is that there's no for example, a monetary trade off, that we can agree on around the issue.

Hannah Gaber: 14:12

The example that you used in our gathering that I found, so illuminating, was like so for example, you know, let's say you're a fanatical follower of a sports team. Yeah. I asked you to burn a jersey on TV, would you do it for $500? Preferably 5 million, almost definitely.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 14:28

Yup.

Hannah Gaber: 14:28

But if I asked you to burn a Torah scroll or a Bible, or for some people, it's probably an American flag, there's no amount of money that I could offer you, for you to do that thing. And it's just out of the question. It's unapproachable.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 14:42

There's no amount of money you could pay me to burn an American flag, I mean, or a Torah scroll or an Israeli flag, right? There's no--

Hannah Gaber: 14:48

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 14:49

Rght.

Hannah Gaber: 14:49

It's an untouchable value. And I can think of so many friends of mine right now. Where if I were to say to them, so let me ask you this. How much money would it take to burn a Bible? They'd be like, That's not we're not having that conversation. There's no doesn't matter. So that would be a sacred value.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 15:04

Right. Which isn't to say that while there's no point in talking, then we're trying to be in relationship because we'll never come right? We'll never come to an agreement on it. Like, I'm not the I'm not the politician, I'm not, that's not my job, right? And there are people that have to figure out how to understand the sacred value and then

Hannah Gaber: 15:24

and then try to change it.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 15:25

We're not we're not, we're not changing--or how to, or how to determine how to offer one sacred value in place of another sacred value, right? That's not...

Hannah Gaber: 15:34

I think we just wanted from a place of understanding that not only do we hold those values, and this might be one of them, but so does the person sitting in front of us, and to enter from a place of respecting that?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 15:46

Yep. I think that's right. And I think it's also important to recognize before you sit down with someone, if it's a sacred value for you, and it's not a sacred value for them, or if it's a sacred value for you, and your feeling is, it should not be a sacred value for them.

Hannah Gaber: 16:07

Oh, that's a good one.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 16:09

This person, like, I have, I am, I'm being vulnerable and honest here. I sometimes see people posting on Facebook, and they're saying, really, really painful things for me to see. And I wonder why they're so invested,

Hannah Gaber: 16:27

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 16:28

In this issue in the first place, because in my mind,

Hannah Gaber: 16:32

it has nothing to do with them,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 16:34

it doesn't have anything to do with them, or they don't, they don't have a stake in it, or they don't have any family or friends there. Right. And that's not to say I shouldn't talk to them. And maybe actually, by talking to them, I would find out that it is a sacred value for them and I'm just being closed minded. But I think if I'm going, if I already think that going into it, then I have to think about how open minded I'm going to be able to be and also if it's going to be too painful for me to feel like this is personal for me, and it's not personal for you, and so now I just feel angry.

Hannah Gaber: 17:09

Yeah, not a great place to engage from.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 17:12

Right.

Hannah Gaber: 17:12

Yeah. And that reminds me of another term that you brought up that I'd love it, if you could help us understand is motive misattribution, that that makes me think of motive misattribution, which as soon as you said it identified with 100%, because

Rabbi Schmelkin: 17:24

Totally.

Hannah Gaber: 17:25

it's like, we fight that we try to back that away all day long. And that goes back to what you just said about just like, can we assume best intent?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 17:31

Yeah

Hannah Gaber: 17:31

Help us understand motive misattribution.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 17:33

So motive, so yeah, motive is attribution is a fun one to do in workshops. Because most of the time you ask somebody, you know, do you sit in a lot of traffic? And there's always somebody in the room who sits in a lot of traffic?

Hannah Gaber: 17:47

Yeah, especially in DC.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 17:48

Especially in DC. And so you say, you know, well, what do you think when someone cuts you off in traffic? Now, when I do this with a room of rabbis and cantors, let me say from the outset, they're always like, "well, maybe the person is in labor and is on their way to the hospital."

Hannah Gaber: 18:02

What is that my mom always says that, is that a Jewish thing? Like what?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 18:05

Maybe it is, maybe it's like, yeah, but oftentimes people are like, I think that that person is a jerk, and they're inconsiderate. And that is that's that's a great way to just to understand motive misattribution, it's our tendency to assume something negative about the intentions of the other person, that they're just careless, that they don't care about us, but the thing is, is that with our own with our with ourselves, we give ourselves the benefit of the doubt or we have a reason, right? If I've cut somebody off, it's because I'm late to I'm late to daycare pickup.

Hannah Gaber: 18:42

My reasons are important. And they're right, and they're justified.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 18:45

And their reasons are stupid.

Hannah Gaber: 18:46

And your reasons are terrible and selfish. Yeah,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 18:49

That's a key part of these conversations is to, to recognize that we might automatically jump to assuming negative intentions or ill will from somebody.

Hannah Gaber: 19:02

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 19:03

When in fact, that's not what's actually going on, the person might say something in a way that really gets under our skin. And they might not have meant to.

Hannah Gaber: 19:14

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 19:15

They just might not know how to say it differently. They might not have the language around it, they might not be as informed as you are.

Hannah Gaber: 19:23

And they certainly can't know how your internal reality will react to it. And I think that for me is the biggest thing that I have to always keep in mind is like, nobody and my my I had a therapist who told me this one time and it was like life-altering for me, which is so stupid because it's it's so obvious, where she was like, where I was saying, you know, this person and that and then I was feeling like that and then did it at it and then she was like, you know, they can't actually see inside your head. They can't actually see inside of you. So however you're feeling whatever you're thinking, in that for my case, it's usually more of like feel free to just not share it because then no one will ever know, like, so there's that, because you think we all think that we're so transparent. And so therefore, how could that person say or do this thing that made me feel X kind of way?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 20:08

Right.

Hannah Gaber: 20:09

They can't actually see it, they don't actually know how you're feeling. So being careless, being thoughtless, being whatever with your words is like, it's almost always I find, has nothing to do with you, just like most people's behavior has everything to do with them. How do we create space? For the people who, for example, when we're looking at Gaza, and Israel at this moment, people like myself, I've just backed away. I don't want to say things a... I would say that most of my fears about saying anything are based in number one, I'm coming from a place of like default of wanting to love people. And I know that there are people who are maybe saying things that they don't realize the origins of or the impact of and, and I don't necessarily want to uncork their emotional state, because I don't think I can take seeing the ugliness that might come out. And I know that that's coming from a place of assumption and fear on my part.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 21:15

Yeah.

Hannah Gaber: 21:16

But on the other hand, it also removes what might be a voice of moderation in this case, my voice from the conversation?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 21:26

Mm hmm.

Hannah Gaber: 21:28

And I don't know, do we have an obligation to engage? If we feel that we have a moderate perspective? How do we deal with that fear of opening ourselves up to further injury?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 21:40

Mm hmm. Yeah, these are I mean, these are the really hard questions. So first of all, I think it's important to say that when I talk about crossing divides, and when I talk about having these conversations, I am not talking about sitting down with an extremist. I am not I'm not talking about sitting down with a neo-Nazi or a white supremacist or a member of Hamas. That's beyond. I--There are people who do that. It's not what I'm talking about.

Hannah Gaber: 22:05

Right.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 22:06

I think that to figure out if and when to engage, and if and when to use our voices, we have to be really self aware.

Hannah Gaber: 22:14

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 22:14

So we have to notice, am I in a place where I'm feeling afraid right now? Because if I'm feeling afraid, then I'm not even aware of things that are going on in my brain where I am scanning my environment, to figure out who is my friend and who is my foe?

Hannah Gaber: 22:34

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 22:34

I'm also not necessarily aware that particular identities that I hold, for example, like a Zionist identity, might be activated above all my other identities, which means that I forget, it becomes it's called a singular rigid identity, when I'm in that space of a singular rigid identity I, I see myself as that one thing, I forget the other parts of myself, I see other people as their singular, rigid identity, and I forget all the parts of them that also are shared between us like being a mom, or being a member of a synagogue or a church, or, I don't know, loving the same musical artists and having gone to five concerts of that person, right, we, so we forget all of those things.

Hannah Gaber: 23:25

The common ground that we have.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 23:26

The common ground, the common ground. Each of us has to ask ourselves, if we are truly ready to hear another person's perspective, and to hold the pain of that. Because it's really not easy. And I think that we have to ask ourselves, when we when we feel resistant or hesitant, "am I resistant and hesitant or feeling like I don't want to do it because I'm because I actually think about other person endangers my life, or is going to be emotionally traumatic for me, or do I just feel it will be uncomfortable?" There's a difference between feeling uncomfortable and feeling like we're in danger.

Hannah Gaber: 24:05

So that being uncomfortable can be a benefit, actually,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 24:08

Absolutely.

Hannah Gaber: 24:09

It's a growth opportunity. Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 24:11

We have to be uncomfortable sometimes. Yeah. And I think and then in thinking about being uncomfortable, and what you said about moderates, and it's an interesting word, right. And we have in the in polarization lingo, we talk about these, the idea of being an in-group moderate. However, that's not about being politically moderate.

Hannah Gaber: 24:35

Right. It's about being a moderating voice.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 24:38

Exactly. You totally get it right. It's about and maybe a norm setter is a better term. But yes, I do think there is this really difficult tension right now of "should I just be silent, because everything is so loaded and so heated, that I just don't want to open my mouth at all or post anything?" And then I think the flip side of that is, then we allow the extreme voice to be loud.

Hannah Gaber: 25:08

And define the discourse.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 25:10

And define the discourse exactly. And, and the hardest thing to do, or one of the hardest things to do is to be that norm setter, or that moderating voice with people in your in-group. So, to be able to look and say, as a Jewish person, there's an extreme voice. And I want to say loudly and clearly as a Jew, whatever your identity group is.

Hannah Gaber: 25:34

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 25:34

That person does not represent me. And that is not what our values say. Yeah, that is not what we believe.

Hannah Gaber: 25:42

I mean, I think first of all, nobody's ever obligated to wade into any exchange?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 25:49

No.

Hannah Gaber: 25:49

I think that that's a really important like thing to just say, right off the top. And, you know, once again, I'm assuming, but I'm assuming we're on the same page on that, because it's just like a basic truth of like

Rabbi Schmelkin: 25:58

Yes.

Hannah Gaber: 25:58

No one's ever obligated to expose themselves to anything, if it feels like it might be harmful.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 26:04

Absolutely.

Hannah Gaber: 26:05

In this type of exchange. So having said that, I, if I hear you, right, what I'm also hearing is like, and this is sort of something I think I've come to on my own as well, if for whatever reason, something maybe feels unsafe to engage with whether or not it's externally or internally unsafe, probably you're just not ready. And so maybe it's just not a good time.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 26:29

Or you need to explore it a little more, yeah, unpack it a little more, and try to figure out where it's coming from.

Hannah Gaber: 26:35

Yeah. And so that's the work that you need to do first, before trying to like, pull anyone else into your figuring out of that stuff. Every exchange you have is going to be part of you figuring it out. So then you're obligating this other person to be a part of that process. And like they're not necessarily prepared for or consenting to that. They're just want to share their views. So I think but I think that that work of like digging deeper has to start with your fundamental question of like, am I afraid? Or am I just uncomfortable? And I don't want to experience that challenge.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 27:04

Yes. I think that's right.

Hannah Gaber: 27:05

And we don't live. I don't feel like we live in a healthy culture of challenge in this country. I think, well, this country is one thing, this specific discourse is a completely different conversation, having a healthy culture of challenge around Israel-Palestine, I don't think that, that I can't imagine those two things being said in the same sentence. And without digging, I don't even necessarily want to go too deeply on the specific conflict or conversation about it. But I just think that like if all of us could hold space for that, like, healthy culture of challenge of like, you can hold a different perspective. And that doesn't implicitly harm me.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 27:43

Yes.

Hannah Gaber: 27:44

I think where it gets really thorny on this specific topic is like a lot of perspectives around Israel, Gaza, Hamas, Zionism, Palestine...On some level, we just have to accept that there are parts of those rhetorics that are part of a larger rhetoric that has led to physical action and political action that has caused harm, and how do we not contribute our voices to the fray? For example, I'm scrolling through my Instagram stories. And I think this is probably the thing most people can relate to the most, and I'm looking at people who I enjoy people that I've loved in the past, and I still would like to think that I love on the basic shared human level, and I don't want to talk to them. I don't want to say anything. I feel like there's such an absence of, shall we say, universally applied morals.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 28:38

MmHmm.

Hannah Gaber: 28:39

And this makes me think of a couple of things that you brought up the other day? What are some of the things that I'm perhaps experiencing? And or seeing when I'm having that experience? As I'm being bombarded by these pieces of rhetoric?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 28:54

It's a great question, I think...So first of all, when you're when you're on Instagram, and you see that post, and I saw one yesterday, I saw one last night, okay, I'll tell you about that in a second, but, our body actually does react to it as a physical threat when we're presented with information, information, ideas, beliefs, that are really different from our own and our and in our counter to what we believe it actually makes our, makes us feel physically threatened. And that's I'm not I let's be clear, I'm not a neuro scientist, or a psychologist, but I have spent enough time talking to people who are at this point,

Hannah Gaber: 29:38

And studying, actually studying.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 29:40

Yes, studying it, and reading articles and research papers and all kinds of things. So that is what's happening. And you know, I do this, I think about this, you know, toxic polarization, constantly, especially now, and I still feel that impulse I see this It was someone I've known since I was very young, very young, I really care about them. I saw their post, and I immediately thought to myself, I need to either comment on it or send them a message. And then I stopped myself and reminded myself, you know, that that's not going to work, right? You know that it's not going to have the outcome that you want.

Hannah Gaber: 30:32

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 30:33

And part of that is backfire effect. We know from research that when we present another person with facts that are counter to the fact that they believe it does not change their minds, it actually makes them dig their heels deeper into what they already think. And they figure out a way to explain away the information that you have given them. And I thought to myself, in that moment, I know that there would be one productive thing that I could do, and that the only productive thing really I could think to do with this person would be to have a phone call, yeah, or set up a zoom, and have a conversation with a very set framework in which we are each open to sharing how we've come to think what we think like, how did I, how did I come to care about the issue of the Israeli Palestinian conflict in the first place? And I would share that, and they would share that. And then to think, and be vulnerable enough to say, here's, here's where I have some doubts on this, like, here's, here's where I have questions, and that they would then also be willing to share that. And then at the end, we might talk about how we wish the conversation is different around the issue, or what our own vision if we have one is for the issue, and even a shared, it could be even a shared sense of despair that the solution seems so out of reach.

Hannah Gaber: 32:10

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 32:10

If I felt like I wasn't in a place emotionally to do that, to try and understand where they're coming from, and how they got to think what they think and feel what they feel. And it would be really hard. And I know that it would be I know that it would be painful, but it would also be illuminating for me. You know, so I think there are the people that we have in our lives that we already love, and we already know them well. And now, in this time of intense, toxic polarization around the Israeli Palestinian conflict,

Hannah Gaber: 32:41

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 32:42

we're finding out things about their views that we didn't know, know before.

Hannah Gaber: 32:47

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 32:47

And that's really hard. And then I think so that's one scenario. And that's the "how do I remember what I love about this person, what I have in common with this person?" And think about how to start from that place.

Hannah Gaber: 33:04

And when you mentioned the backfire effect, my first thought was also that self-interrogation of is that what I'm experiencing? Is it possible that really, it's me digging in? And they've said something that hurts because it disagrees with my predisposition that I may not have even been aware that I held until that moment?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 33:25

Definitely.

Hannah Gaber: 33:27

What are some other things that we need to try and stay aware of within our own selves physiologically, neurologically, psychologically, that you've come across in your training in this field, that can help us to not be so? I mean, triggered is such an overused word, but triggered that yeah, help us not become a part of polarization that becomes toxic.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 33:52

Yeah. So I think, first of all, when we are when we are triggered when we are when those identities are being act being activated, when we feel scared, our body tells us that our face turns red, our heart races, we start sweating. It's happened to me so many times since October 7, yes, from something that somebody says or something that I read. And, you know, I always feel funny, giving people the advice to breathe, because I'm not always very good at it. But when I can make myself take a few deep breaths, or do like a 4-7-8 breathing exercise that I've learned somewhere along the way, it really does help. It really does help. And then there's also the question of, how do I talk to somebody I've never met before.

Hannah Gaber: 34:54

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 34:54

And what I would say about that is that the most successful time successful conversations I have had about really tough issues, including abortion with people who identify as evangelical Christian and have really completely different views on the subject than I do, we did not have those conversations until we had gotten to know each other really well. We had first learned about each other's interests where we had grown up, you know, bonded over both having dogs. As silly as that might sound. It was really months and months of relationship building before we ever had that conversation. So I already liked them and cared about them and that feeling was mutual. Yeah, when we finally talked about it. That's not to say that there's never a one-off dialogue, that can work. Because I know people that lead them, and I know people who research them. But they have to be set up really well and structured really well, and people have to really follow the structure that's being set up. So it just takes so much thoughtfulness.

Hannah Gaber: 36:13

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 36:14

And skill and self awareness and self regulation. Right to be able to, to do that.

Hannah Gaber: 36:24

So don't just pop off at a stranger on Instagram.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 36:28

Exactly. Exactly. And you know, it's really I personally don't think these these disagreements on Instagram or Facebook, in the comment sections.

Hannah Gaber: 36:44

Yeah, no one's teaching anyone anything,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 36:46

I think they're pretty useless.

Hannah Gaber: 36:47

Yeah. And I think and this is, you know, if anything, I think it gives momentum to the animosity, I think it just turns up the volume on the on the, on the disdain and on the dismissiveness that is already present.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 37:05

I think there's one other thing that can feel complicated about this, especially when we're talking about social media.

Hannah Gaber: 37:10

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 37:11

And that is that there is real dis disinformation out there and misinformation. And I've seen a number of articles in recent days about how many bots and what they're putting out, and, the impulse to correct the disinformation or misinformation when we see it is not wrong. But again, we have to know that while it might be important to try and correct that information, we might not have the skills and tools we need to successfully do it. And if we care about it, there are ways to learn about how to do that. Yeah.

Hannah Gaber: 37:53

For those who do want to use their voices, for those who do want to wade into whatever conversation around Israel-Palestine, or around the specific current conflict, what are some basic trainings or tips that you can offer basic conversational tools, for example, that, sure, we could all use them in our daily life to make sure that our conversations are a little more conflict free, but like, what are some basic starting points to open these discussions to make sure that we are certainly not contributing to a toxic level of polarization, and could even be a de escalation technique, even if they are only effective towards ourselves? From my perspective, we sort of have to dismiss the idea that any exchange on social media is going to be productive. I think if you have a one on one relationship with someone, and they have posted something that has deeply, deeply hurt you, if you trust that one on one relationship, enough to reach out to them and say, Hey, can we have a conversation? Okay. But I think that everybody has to be realistic about their expectations for engagement online

Rabbi Schmelkin: 39:08

Agreed.

Hannah Gaber: 39:08

You cannot, I feel very strongly of like if I see someone's string of things on their Instagram story. Unless I cared deeply about that person in that specific relationship. I'm just not going to say anything. I don't think me hitting them back with a bunch of other news media or other propaganda or other organization talking points is really going to get me anywhere. And I don't I personally am not really interested in just having an argument. And I just think we all need to admit to ourselves, if that's what we're going to engage with, we're going to just end up having an argument. So for the purposes of this conversation, and of the only types of conversations that like, for example, maybe people like me who are just tired and I don't want to be a part of the yelling match,

Rabbi Schmelkin: 39:57

Yeah.

Hannah Gaber: 39:57

If I'm going to engage, I would like it to be meaningful. So how can we engage in conversations that might be meaningful? Even if we don't, let's assume we don't even know that other person's perspective; How do we approach with Beginner's Mind and remain non reactionary? In trying to have these conversations with people? Or any conversations with people?

Rabbi Schmelkin: 40:22

Yeah, I think you have to set some ground rules in your own mind, and maybe even together, saying, I'm going to ask questions from a place of curiosity, not to not to do a gotcha question not to catch someone in their hypocrisy. I'm going to, because I'm sitting down with somebody that I've known, or somebody who has shown me that they really also are interested in understanding where I come from, I'm going to assume that they have good intentions. While I'm sitting with them, I have to go into it knowing that they might say something that rubs me the wrong way, but that they're not out, they're not out there to hurt me. They're not sitting down with me to try and hurt me. If we're going to really be open and honest, and we have to trust the person is going to keep what we say confidential. I might share views I might share, I might share doubts, my own doubts about parts of the issue that we're talking about whether it's Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or abortion, or immigration, or whatever it is. And I have to be able to trust that they're not going to then go post on Facebook, here's what Rabbi Rachel Schmelkin said, and viceversa, right? They have to be able to trust me, too. Those are some of the very basic, basic things, I think,

Hannah Gaber: 41:45

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 41:46

The questions that I use, both formally in workshops, and casually in conversation come from what I've learned from the One America movement and Over Zero, which is an organization that's amazing, and does really important violence prevention work, and understanding how conflict can become violent.

Hannah Gaber: 42:06

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 42:06

So the questions really, they start with personal story. So in a formal setting, the question we're saying is, how did you come to know or care about this issue? And when does this issue come up for you? There are more informal ways to to say that, right? Like I had lunch with someone last week, who has very different views on the Israeli Palestinian conflict than I do. And I think I started out the conversation, saying something like, tell me about your relationship with Israel. And have you been there? Or when did when is when did you start learning about it? It was a similar way of getting at the same kind of question. And then she asked me back and I shared, right,

Hannah Gaber: 42:47

Yeah

Rabbi Schmelkin: 42:48

Then I think you move to thinking about, it's really they're very reflective questions.

Hannah Gaber: 42:55

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 42:55

How have you? How have you come to believe what you believe? How did you get there? What has solidified your beliefs on the issue? What has caused you to doubt, have doubts around this issue? What questions do you have about the issue? Right? It's really vulnerable, to say, well, sometimes I wonder about this. Or sometimes I hear this thing that someone on the other side, that's air quotes, right, someone on the other team says, and I wonder if they might have a point a point, right, it's vulnerable to say that, and then the question moves then to kind of thinking bigger, thinking outside the box, really kind of a place of hope. Like, how do I wish the conversation around this issue was different? Like I remember once in one of these conversations I had about abortion with people who thought about it really differently than I did, we found ourselves both saying at the end, I wish that the words that we just the words themselves about how we describe ourselves weren't so loaded. And there were more options between pro-choice and pro-life or anti-choice or anti-life or that all of those terms are so loaded, and lack nuance and leave no room for gray area.

Hannah Gaber: 44:23

And they immediately place you in a camp, they place you as a part of a group and an identity.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 44:28

Yes. And I think we see that sometimes with pro Israel or pro Palestine, right. Either I'm this, or I'm that when you actually could be both.

Hannah Gaber: 44:40

Yeah

Rabbi Schmelkin: 44:40

And many people are.

Hannah Gaber: 44:42

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 44:42

And so I think that there are there are many kinds of epiphanies that we can have in these conversations when we start to ask a question and share our thoughts and listen to someone else's on how could the conversation be different? What's my vision for this issue, or how people could talk about the issue?

Hannah Gaber: 44:58

Yeah.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 44:59

It doesn't mean that you'll walk away feeling happy. Yeah, I think it's kind of like for people that do therapy, you don't always end a therapy appointment.

Hannah Gaber: 45:13

"Oh, I feel so much better."

Rabbi Schmelkin: 45:14

Right, you often don't feel better, but you feel like you grew in some way or you feel like your mind was open to something in yourself that you hadn't seen before. And I think these conversations can be like that. And I think it's important when you go into them to remember that the goal of the conversation is not to change the other person's mind and persuade them to think what you think. Yeah. And if that's why you're doing it, then this probably isn't the right choice.

Hannah Gaber: 45:44

Or just prepare for conflict.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 45:46

Or prepare for conflict. That's right.

Hannah Gaber: 45:48

That's like, if you're coming into it to try and rearrange someone else's thoughts, get ready for a fight. Yep.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 45:55

Cuz it's really unlikely. It's really unlikely.

Hannah Gaber: 45:58

Mm hmm. I can't thank you enough for this conversation.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 46:04

Thank you for having me.

Hannah Gaber: 46:06

This is very healing for me. And maybe I selfishly like, that's why I was like, can we just talk about it, because I just like, and I'm also a person who obviously like, loves to talk. And so it's been a really interesting experience to feel to like move to the opposite default of, I don't want to say anything, I just don't want to be a part of the yelling match. I just don't want to. And I also don't want to have to feel like I have to explain my feelings. And I think that's the other thing that we could all do for one another. Okay, so to answer the question, "How I wish the conversation were different:"

Rabbi Schmelkin: 46:37

Yeah.

Hannah Gaber: 46:37

I wish that we could all just leave space. For the legitimacy of everybody's suffering. The suffering of any individual is not any more or less legitimate than the suffering of another individual. And, and I think we just don't need to erase one another's experiences. I wish the conversation were different in that I wish we could all just hold space for everybody's different experience being as real as everybody else's, and not feel the need to dismiss or discount or erase any of those experiences or voices.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 47:13

Well I think what you're saying right, like in, in Jewish in Jewish language, is b'tzelem Elohim, recognizing that every person is made in the image of God? And how would it change our interactions with people and our thoughts about people? If we looked at them and said, there, there is godliness in you. There's something divine in you, there's holiness in you. And when you look at me, you see holiness, and divinity, and godliness in me too.

Hannah Gaber: 47:53

Ken Y'hi Ratzon.

Rabbi Schmelkin: 47:55

Amen.

Hannah Gaber: 47:58

Just want to say a very huge and special thank you to Rabbi Schmelkin, for coming on the pod. I cannot imagine how exhausted you must be, Rabbi, from having this and similar conversations over and over again. Your graciousness, and your contribution is so appreciated, as is the support of Washington Hebrew, who I just want to give a special shout out to, who has not just been supportive of this podcast from the very beginning, but of spreading the values and indulging the curiosity that inspired these conversations in the first place. So thank you so much to you guys. Thank you so much to you, the listeners for joining us. And please don't forget to tell a friend if you know anyone who might benefit or just be curious about conversations like this. And please give us a follow five stars positive review all the things but mostly, just want to say especially right now, when it's so exhausting to take in even more words. Thank you for being here. Jew-ish is a Say More production.