Overcoming conflict in public debates
A recent study on conservative and liberal religious activists shows that the religious right is increasingly being matched by a resurgent religious left. While good news to some, it provoked this question from David Gibson: Are the religious left and the religious right doomed to be Chinese fighting fish (ie, mirror images of each other, engaged in to-the-death struggle)?
This is a vivid and disturbing image people of faith and, from what I see here at FPL, one that moderate and progressive faith leaders take very seriously. Faith activists who want to bring a justice- and compassion-centered voice to public debates on issues like health reform, immigration and climate also value fostering civility and respect.
I’m grateful for their creativity. As one who taunted my pet Chinese fighting fish with a mirror and found that it didn’t live long, I would be concerned if our resurgent movement imitated the Christian right’s tactics (such as propagating misinformation) and tone and didn’t take up a call to be peacemakers and reconcilers even as we sought to win on issues of justice.
We grapple with this every day at FPL, whether when wording an action alert, responding to misinformation or providing communications strategy for our partners. This might reassure those concerned about CFFS (Chinese Fighting Fish Syndrome).
The hardest part about avoiding CFFS is that it can be hard to break through a media and culture that loves conflict and hype. Fortunately, I think there is a way to prevent CFFS and avoid becoming a part of the polarization. Our health reform work with partners this summer, which mobilized hundreds of thousands of people of faith, provided some useful lessons:
- Build coalitions as broadly as possible so that we build trust among diverse faith communities. The health reform effort brought together social conservatives and social liberals, Evangelicals, mainline Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims. This not only made it more powerful, it also built bridges across constituencies often divided by partisanship.
- Be bold and surprising, but don’t design a campaign around shock value. The local clergy and religious activists who appeared in our radio and TV ads this summer went out on a limb to speak out about a hot national issue, and some even risked their jobs. Their risk helped shift the tenor of debates on health care at the end of August. Because the ads complemented our on-the-ground organizing and featured local leaders, the integrated campaign caught the eye of the media and other influencers. We were able to deliver our message in a way that was compelling– encouraging, not biting.
I wonder how others view this. Should faith leaders just embrace their inner Chinese fighting fish, or should we carve out a different way forward? How should faith leaders handle conflict in public debates?
–Rev. Jennifer Butler, Executive Director, Faith in Public Life