Because democracy is open, it is vulnerable to demagogues and autocrats; yet because it is open, it is also resilient, able to learn and improve, and responsive to popular wisdom.
Biden and Harris won the election, but what exactly did they win? What was lost in the process? And, as mediators and citizens, what do we do next?
Even after the election results are finalized and the new President inaugurated, one thing will remain unresolved – the deep divide within the nation that the campaigns for the presidency confirmed.
The world is watching one of the most divisive periods in American history.
Civility, respect, understanding, and the willingness to listen. These are core conversational virtues that are universally appreciated.
Globally, as waves of nationalism and existentialism begin to unsettle democratic institutions, as ideologies driven by hatred conspire to digitally divide millions, as 8 billion people are instigated to talk more and listen less – dialogue remains relevant and mediators are valued more than ever.
With increasing political polarization in the United States, political absolutists are halting the practice of compromise and collaboration for their Congressional representatives.
I will attempt to speculate on a few of the possible consequences of the Trump presidency for the field of conflict resolution and negotiation.
Donald Trump’s primary approach to the resolution of conflict is to focus on what he sees as his power advantage over the party with whom he is dealing, and to rely on that presumed power advantage to force the other party to agree to his terms.
The world of conflict, negotiation, and public policy mediation has markedly changed since the election of Donald J. Trump as president of the United States.
Trump’s behavior in the the Presidency reflects many of his New York negotiation experiences and guidelines, for better and worse.
Review of Martin E. Latz. The Real Trump Deal: An Eye-Opening Look at How He Really Negotiates.
The attempted negotiation concerning the government shutdown and border security is viewed by many as a tragedy of historic proportion, serving up examples of hubris, ignorance of established negotiation practices, and brinksmanship.
This article by Milan Slama and Ken Rasmussen is the second part to discuss the current political divide.
This article by Ken Rasmussen and Milan Slama is the second part to discuss the current political divide.
This article discusses the ideological divide looking at conflict from both a mediator's (Part 1) and a therapist's perspective (Part 2).
Dispute Resolution leader Kenneth Cloke discusses how we can discuss politics to bring about change instead of division.
The shutdown over a wall on the southern border shows how the political parties have ignored and violated several tenets of bargaining essential to reach an agreement.
This article discusses facilitating political dialogue with Make America Dinner Again.
Interestingly, since beginning of this series of posts several months back, the topic of seeking greater respect and civility in our political and social interactions has ratcheted up significantly, even becoming mainstream!
In April 2018, the U.S. Justice Department implemented a new “zero-tolerance” policy for the detention and arrest of undocumented immigrants. This article discusses how mediation techniques can be used to handle such a difficult situation.
Several experts have commented on the trauma the children must have experienced being separated from their families.
The trial of Paul Manafort is a good illustration of an important value of trials.
Everyone’s talking polarization these days.
So… is the attorney in the Daniels/Trump case in a no-win situation here?