Harmony, Not Unity

In the contentious, partisan environment currently swamping our political culture, we hear plaintive calls for calm, compromise, and unity. Unfortunately, we hear at least as many angry calls for total victory by one side over the other.

The current situation here in Wisconsin offers an instructive look at the main outlines of the problem and may hint at solutions. After weeks of bitter dispute over the new governor’s budget and plans to strip bargaining rights from public union members, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel published a thoughtful and refreshing column written by two prominent Wisconsin citizens on opposite sides of the dispute.

The column, signed by Kevin Conroy and Jim Connelly, a Democrat and a Republican, concluded that “We need to show individual leadership by calling for a decrease in partisan shouting and by getting directly involved in bipartisan business growth initiatives. One thing is very obvious: We can’t do it divided.”

My only quibble with that column is in the headline: “Wisconsin’s Prosperity Requires Unity.” That headline, of course, was probably written by a headline writer and not by the authors of the column itself. Nonetheless, the issue is worth attention. I would suggest that “unity” is a misleading and elusive goal. I would rather we aim for harmony.

Aiming for unity suggests that we should all agree on most if not all strategies and tactics, which of course also assumes that we agree on goals and objectives. To point a metaphor, people unified on political and economic issues is a lot like a choir singing in unison. Everyone sings the same notes at the same time. That assumes that sopranos can sing bass notes and basses can sing soprano notes.

Harmony, however, requires us to sing different notes in a coordinated effort, as long as we agree to sing the same song in the same key at the same tempo. The concept of harmony respects the integrity of each section – bass, tenor, alto, soprano – in the service of richer, more complex, and ultimately more satisfying music.

Aiming for unity asks us to choose one of the following alternatives: ask or force the other side to give up its integrity, surrender integrity for the sake of unity, or concoct a compromise which both sides can support. The more deeply each side is committed to its own principles, the less likely they are to settle for any of these alternatives.

Aiming for harmony starts with the simple act of listening to the other side and choosing to get to know people on the other side in all their complex humanity. Aiming for harmony asks us to quit demonizing the people on the other side and to quit distorting their arguments. It requires some measure of empathy, the driving force of all moral and ethical behavior. It requires us to look for verifiable information and to quit spouting unverifiable ideology. It is worth noting, by the way, that all ideology is unverifiable. That’s what makes it ideology rather than information, knowledge, or wisdom.

Collaborative leadership always starts with relationship building and agreement on basic principles like democratic process and empirical evidence, which can take a long time. It is, however, worth the effort, since it promotes harmony – coordinated action in pursuit of shared goals while maintaining the integrity of the participants. It helps us avoid the toxic and fruitless condition of “us versus them” and it helps us remember that our political adversaries are also our neighbors and fellow citizens.