It’s Our Culture, Stupid
I am so tired of the bickering. If you view the president as the Chief Community Officer of our country, he has inflicted a horrible thing on us. A culture of vitriol and division. Regardless of anything else that he does, I cannot forgive him for this. And yes, it’s his fault. How a leader behaves, what they allow, and what they promote creates the culture around them.
He will fire our military heroes when they show the courage that we told them was required for their role. He will mock the national anthem, people with physical disabilities, and many others. He has no shame — allowing others to also have no shame. Trump will spit in the face of all that his supporters hold dear in order to test their loyalty. These stunts also help him gauge how exhausted and helpless the rest of us feel, knowing if he beats us down enough we will give up.
I don’t think there are many people who think this aspect of our current situation is desirable, although many place the blame for it on others rather than the president.
In this toxic environment, we have a presidential campaign — making it highly anxiety-provoking with no clear consensus on how best to proceed or which problems to tackle first. It is resulting in a lot of undecided voters in the Democratic primary. The field is strong — there is no candidate that seems anywhere near as toxic as the current president and all of them have strengths. Add to that, presidential campaigns often seem like schoolyard brawls where one candidate tries to show dominance over another and beat them down. For many of the candidates and their supporters, it’s ‘my way or the highway’ - it is exhausting and off-putting. For that reason, I think many people ignore them entirely.
Why can’t we be nicer to each other? To many, that sounds hopelessly naive. But to me, this is a question that runs much deeper than being superficially polite — it’s a different leadership mindset I am after. I’ve seen a lot of conversations about how we need to fight Trump with overwhelming might; more money or more force. I personally do not think this is a great strategy because he is morally adrift — he has no limits to which he will comply. We simply cannot play his game — we will lose. So — how can we play a different game, sidestepping the fight he wants to have entirely?
For me, both the president's behavior and the competitive norm of the traditional leadership model is a zero-sum, hero-centric, scarcity-based mindset that is dying, albeit slowly. It’s what we’ve been acclimated to believe is necessary but it’s one that is profoundly abusive. It’s based on the assumption that one person is better than another and that to win, you must pound the other into the dust. It’s what gave us slavery. It’s what allows us to economically disenfranchise people and then as justification, blame them a la the ‘welfare queen’ narrative. It allows us not to see each other.
It is going to kill us and our democracy if we let it.
This approach, to a lesser or greater degree, has generally been the norm in our politics and especially in our presidential politics. It’s never sat particularly well with me and because of that, I’ve never gotten involved. At best it has seemed like a necessary evil. Until this year.
Senator Warren is running a very different campaign that, to me, represents an inclusive and collaborative mindset grounded in abundance, win-win, and shared value thinking. It eschews the need to tear others down in order to win — instead it welcomes a dialog about what matters. It engages us in a shared conversation of what we want, rather than how we react to someone else.
This leadership results in a very different campaign culture than either the current political culture or the now somewhat renowned Bernie Bro culture. In contrast, you see inquisitive, positive, and supportive behaviors from Warren’s fans and very little negativity. Sanders has denounced some of the more extreme bullying in his base but Warren doesn’t even have to — her supporters self-moderate because they have already bought into the ethos, whether implicitly or explicitly.
To me, Senator Warren uses a masterful community-based leadership approach. Her campaign in internally consistent from the way she speaks to its guidance for volunteers. In-person, she enthusiastically welcomes supporters of candidates that have dropped out like Julian Castro’s while actively telling crowds that what she likes about her competitors. That alone is refreshing enough. Digging deeper, you see this approach reflected all the way down to the tactical guidelines for texting.
As someone who helps clients write community guidelines, this is an excellent and simple set of rules. In particular, it places much greater emphasis on how a volunteer should behave and the emotional goal they are looking for rather than what is prohibited— it is overwhelmingly positive. It emphasizes validation, dialog, and support. The result? Lots of volunteers are getting feedback from voters that they appreciate the difference between getting texts from Warren’s campaign over other candidates. It impacts how Warren’s volunteers talk to and interact with everyone, online and in-person. It’s noticeable in the culture of the campaign, if you are paying attention.
I am a member of Warren’s online community, her Reddit community, and her volunteer Slack channel, all of which play different roles in her community ecosystem. The first community seems primarily a place to find and share more official information, the second is a place to connect and discuss issues with others, and the third is a place to collaborate and support other volunteers who are doing work. It looks very similar to the digital ecosystems of our clients at The Community Roundtable — creating different communities for different types of engagement behavior and outcomes. The more complex the desired outcome, the tighter and smaller the community. We break that down into four general types of engagement behaviors — those that validate, share, ask & answer, and explore each of which plays a different role depending on the goal of the community.
The biggest critique I have of her digital ecoystem is that there is not a lot of integration or handshakes between the different spaces, although there is some. They more or less operate independently of each other and are not well-promoted to people following Warren more casually. That is a lost opportunity because what you will see in each, is a reflection of the positive culture she promotes and moderates — one that would show others the difference between her approach and those of other candidates. This is especially important in a news and information environment where no one knows what to believe and trust.
At in-person events, this cultural difference is palpable — you leave feeling connected and positive. In a country that feels adrift and fighting, you feel hopeful. It is powerful but obviously has limits — she can’t be everywhere at once. Actively driving more people to get involved with her online community network would help many more feel the difference in her campaign, which is a powerful elixir.
What we’ve found at TheCR is that participation in these communities empowers people by helping them feel seen, heard, and validated. This is exactly what I see in Warren’s inner circle. It is exactly what so many people in our country need desperately.
Most of all, I think Warren is demonstrating that there is hope. There is a way forward that can be different. It is showing us we can heal from the divisiveness and acrimony established by the Trump administration. We don’t have to hate each other to win. We can have differences of opinion and still move forward together.
More listening, more validating, and less screaming. Isn’t that exactly what we need right now?
