Obama on the Importance of Conflict
I often write about the benefits of conflict, and how avoiding or resolving conflict may not be as important as benefiting from it. In looking at conflict, we find that it is not just an unfortunate situation we need to make the best of, but rather, it is essential. As well-known mediator Ron Kraybill has said, “no meaningful change takes place in the absence of conflict.”
Regardless of your opinions on President Obama and his policies, today in meeting with Republican leaders he made a statement which echoes what I’ve been saying:
Having differences of opinion, having a real debate about matters of domestic policy and national security, that’s not something that’s not only good for our country, [it’s] absolutely essential. It’s only by the process of disagreement and debate that bad ideas get tossed out and good ideas get refined and made better, and that kind of vigorous back and forth – that imperfect but well-founded process, as messy as it often is – is at the heart of our democracy. (emphasis is mine)
At least on this point, he’s hit the nail on the head.
January 31st, 2010 on 10:23 pm
Barack Obama can teach the nation more about mediation than anyone. So far, however, it seems that a lot of Americans are not that interested in mediating political conflicts, but would rather fight them out. Here is a post I did on his meeting with Republican Congressmen: http://www.hopeandchange.net/2010/01/president-vs-gop.html
which is not so much on the point of the president’s acting like a mediator but very much on the point of his being interested in a fair debate.
On the president as national mediator-in-chief, I did this post on my mediation blog: http://www.hopeandchange.net/2010/01/president-vs-gop.html
January 31st, 2010 on 10:25 pm
Sorry, that second link should have been: http://www.mediate-la.com/2009/07/beer-summit.html