The Promise of “Listening” Rhetoric in 2024
By Erec Smith, Ph.D.
No one can deny the rise of targeted violence, defined as “Intentional physical violence against a pre-identified target based on their perceived identity or affiliation, whereby the act is intended to intimidate or coerce or generate publicity about the perpetrator’s grievance.” Examples of targeted violence stem from the political left and right, exemplified by incidents like the shooting of the Tree of Life Synagogue congregants and the a Republican member of Congress and four others at a baseball park. Given subsequent mass shootings, fear of more such incidents is warranted.
While many blame easy access to firearms, others believe the issue may start long before a person decides to pick up a gun. As simplistic as it may sound, listening is an initial key, but not just any kind of listening. Active listening is a skill in need of development throughout society, and organizations exist to assist in teaching and honing that skill.
I am proud to be part of United to Prevent Targeted Violence, a project affiliated with Urban Rural Action, an organization funded by the Department of Homeland Security that is dedicated to “Bridging Americans together across divides to tackle our nation’s most urgent challenges.” Targeted violence is such a challenge, and Urban Rural Action believes that dialogue—especially its listening component—is the first step.
United to Prevent Targeted Violence (UPTV), is situated in South-Central Pennsylvania, focuses on the prevention of targeted violence in general, we recently published a statement addressing political violence, specifically. “In a recent survey by the National League of Cities, 81% of local public officials surveyed said they had experienced harassment, threats, or violence in recent years. In addition to posing a serious threat to our communities’ safety, political violence prevents our democratic processes from working well.
For UPTV, an initial step to preventing political violence is to listen actively, to “embrace curiosity about different political views rather than rejecting those views outright; respect political views with which we disagree; separate the people who hold views we disagree with from the views themselves; and appreciate the humanity of those on the other side even as we rally for our causes and preferred candidates.” We can simply active listening as “The ABCs for Constructive Dialogue: Ask, Check, and Break down one’s viewpoint.
Of course, this tactic is easier said than done; most people want to focus primarily on “B.” They want to explain their views more than they want to understand others’ views, if they want to understand them at all.
To listen constructively, we must ask clear questions, listen to the answers, and “check our understanding” by asking for clarification until the speaker confirms her viewpoint has been understood accurately. After one person speaks, the listener can make statements like “If I hear you correctly, you’re saying X.” If the listener’s interpretation is not accurate, the speaker must clarify until the listener gets it right. After getting it right, the speaker can ask follow-up questions. Only after the speaker believes a full understanding of her views has been reached, can the listener become the speaker and vice versa.
Unfortunately, some people listen to discover the weakness in another’s argument in an attempt to win a verbal battle. This is not active listening. The late rhetorician, Wayne Booth, gets it right when he defines active listening—what he calls “Listening Rhetoric”—as a sincere attempt to get at “the truth behind our differences.” According to Booth, if I had a sincere desire to find this truth, I would “have reason to hope that my opponent here will respond to my invitation for both of us to engage in genuine listening.” Scrutiny is fine, but an attitude of battle, as opposed to a collaborative search for truth, is a formidable obstacle to understanding. This is why UPTV’s ABC method is invaluable. A listener’s attempt to “Ask” and “Check” before expounding on his own views can better ensure the speaker feels heard but respected. Perhaps then, the speaker will be more inclined to listen genuinely, herself.
Although this essay focuses on the current election year, let us not forget that effective communication is a sine qua non of a free and civil democracy. Communication is necessary in such a system. Therefore, it is not an exaggeration to say that our country goes as our ability to communicate goes. Urban Rural action and UPTV take this idea seriously. We can realize the promise of listening, but we all must play our parts.