Last October I was walking to lunch with a friend. The Vice-Presidential debate happened the night before, and I glibly remarked about my hopes for the election outcome. Until that moment, I didn’t realize that my friend felt differently.
After about 30 minutes of awkward but polite conversation, it was clear that we disagreed. I tried to mute my sarcasm, but it slipped out once when I said, “If Darth Vader pretended to support the policies you supported, would you still vote for him?”
It’s a struggle to communicate well and keep communicating after knowing you’re not in the safety of mutual opinion.
I slipped up, but we carried on like usual. I was lucky. To disagree without damaging relation is the needed art of our day and one I need to practice.
A relationist will have opinions that will rub some the wrong way, but their primary focus is elevating commitment to each other over ideology.
This way of life will run you right into a sticky struggle of having to wait patiently, listen, and choose to see each person as a whole person - body, mind, heart and soul.
Relationists know that being ‘efficient’ with people won’t work. They understand as Stephen Covey put it: “With people, slow is fast and fast is slow."
A relationist optimizes for deep commitment over elevated ego. They know that one preserved friendship, one nurtured bond with a neighbor, keeps us from isolation and division.
We cannot afford to lose others' richness by sidelining only those who perfectly align with our preferences. My friend and I see many issues differently - economics, politics, religion - and he’s one of the best people I know.
I hope those observations never surprise me.