Larry D. Lauer

This week Congress finally was able to orchestrate a strategy to reopen the government and avoid default on American debt. But while a method was finally reached to make this happen, no significant communication lessons were learned about the long-range damage of extreme polarization… even among many moderates.

For example, the Texas Republicans all voted against the bi-partisan bill. Voting as an extremist block has communication dynamic consequences. It confuses what you really believe in the minds of your audiences, destroys your capacity to be singularly understood as a strong leader, and makes you look like you lack the courage to stand out when the situation calls for it.

I use this example because I know some of these people. I thought I knew where they stood politically, but also on matters of true statesmanship. It has nothing to do with my political preferences. I am as bi-partisan as anyone… a little left of center on a few social issues, and slightly right of center on financial ones. Rather my communication consequence concerns are about the necessary ground rules for constructive debating in a democratic society.

As a communicator I describe these ground roles like this: As a politician you argue what you honestly believe during the campaign and when bills are being developed. In the final analysis, however, you behave like a statesman. You understand that compromise is not losing and can be win-win, that changes can be made over time, and that your main job after compromise is to win the next election.

To behave otherwise, the communication consequence is chaos and confusion. Thoughtful individuals lose capacity to lead. And American “exceptionalism” declines as a positive identity and becomes a negative perception all over the world.

Read Full Post »

The Republican Tea Party extremists are ignoring the lessons of how communication ultimately works. This is not any longer merely an ideological dispute within the Republican Party. The Tea Party extremists are setting up a communication dynamic that can not only destroy their party, but it also has the potential to destroy our system of democracy.

These rebels might be able to secure their own re-election in their narrowly drawn ultra-conservative congressional districts. But what good is this if they cannot win back the White House, where they will have their only real opportunity to change how government works.

In his op-ed piece in the New York Times this week Tom Friedman reinforced that this is more than party politics. He observed that “our very democracy is at stake.” He reminds us that “majority rule is still the rule,” and that Obama-care is the law. This is not merely an ideological disagreement. “Our democracy is imperiled.”

Majority rules is our system. A law is a law. Win the election first, then move to change the world.  Republican strategy now should be aimed at winning the national election.

It’s customary in American politics for the political pendulum to swing from right to left and back again. With that in mind, here is a better strategy for Republicans:

(1) Assert a belief in the American political system.

(2) Acknowledge that Obama won the election.

(3) Explain that Republicans used every acceptable legislative tactic available to them to change a law they do not like, but now the time has come to re-open government.

(4) Begin now to unite and energize the party by reminding all Republicans that only with solid unity can they win back the White House. This is the only effective way in our system to change how government works.

Our democratic system is based on solid communication dynamics: Argue your differences aggressively. Be willing to compromise when the time for argument has past. Once past, respect that a law is a law. Accept that winning an election is a legitimate opportunity to lead. And then regroup to win back the White House the next time.

Read Full Post »