Introduction: In this seemingly endless election season, just about everyone who believes they have any angle at all on making sense of what is going on has weighed in with their analysis.
So why not conflict professionals?
Elections are in essence a way of engaging in social conflict. Sometimes constructively, sometimes not so much.
The very structure of elections leads to escalation of existing or latent conflicts—with the idea that issues will then be laid out, differences underscored, and voters offered a clear choice.
Electioneering is almost never about what candidates agree about – unless it is that all of us in one party are infinitely better then all of them in the other – but what they disagree about and how they are different.
So we propose that those of us who study conflict join the crowded field of opiners about this election. We invite anyone who wishes to do so to submit a short (< 1200 words) commentary on the election from a conflict practitioner’s perspective. The goal is to take a creative look at what is transpiring using the conceptual and practical tools we bring to our work— not to promote any particular candidacy. And we encourage responses to what others have posted - the more action, the more interesting. We encourage you to link to this discussion wherever you feel it would be appropriate to do so.
For our opening post we offer:
From the Blog of Phyllis G. Pollack. Almost four years ago (February 23, 2007), I posted a blog on ‘Fairness”. I had attended a training session in which the teacher...
By Phyllis PollackThere is an on-going controversy in Los Angeles County about "court ordered" free mediations. On the one hand, the ADR Committee has steadfastly maintained that Los Angeles is under a...
By Jan Frankel SchauGot a note recently from Herbert Ong of Kudosworks.com, the referral and testimonial tool I profiled last year. He let me know that they had addressed my original concern and...
By Dina Beach Lynch