About two years ago the NVC Academy organized an online symposium on Removing Our Blinders: Seeing the Impact of Power and Privilege. The symposium offered opportunities for those of European background and people of color to share their experiences as well as men and women, and for others to empathically listen in a virtual fishbowl.
This approach, of structured group speaking and listening, seemed to me to be a uniquely Nonviolent Communication (NVC) approach to social change and powerful use of empathy. I wonder what the world would be like if we could have more symposiums of this kind, and group mourning circles, for all that is happening in the world today including around the #Metoo movement, the environment, and species extinction.
In the context of co-leading one of the fishbowls and symposiums, I received an email from someone who had emailed all the symposium trainers challenging our involvement. This person wrote that “there’s no correlation when talking about subjective differences such as privilege and NVC…” and saw this focus a deviation from NVC principles and out of integrity with what Marshall Rosenberg (the creator of NVC) taught. I found this take on NVC both confusing and surprising. I took care and effort in responding to the person; below is a modified version of my response. For me, Nonviolent Communication is a form of social change, and addressing power is intrinsic to creating that change.
For me, every conversation we engage involves power of some kind—be it structural (based on laws, institutions, hierarchy, or social status—i.e. “privilege”) or relational (based on prior experience/interactions in the relationship). Structural power takes the form of institutions and practices (what Foucault called “Power”) and the ideas, beliefs, assumptions, prejudices, and ideology that supports or justifies the structural Power (what Foucault called “Knowledge”). One cannot operate without the other. The ideology (the thinking, the beliefs) justifies and enables the system and structures. A quick example: Could slavery or Jim Crow have happened without racism? Or women denied the right to vote (and still today face physical and sexual violence) without sexism and misogyny?
Marshall explored this link between language/thought (Knowledge) and structure/action (Power) in the interview I did with him in The Sun magazine. When working with police in Israel, Marshall discovered from talking with them that each time there had been a physical act of violence (a gun was taken out and/or used) it had been proceeded by some verbal exchange first. This offers a simple example (thoughts lead to action). And, this micro example is replicated on every level of our society.
If you reflect on this, when we treat someone “badly” it’s because we’re already having a judgment or evaluation of them. Our thoughts precede our actions. Likewise, on a societal level, beliefs and prejudices inform how are institutions are structured and operate—and most of them, I am sad to say, including education, health care, and our justice system, are based on power-over, which implicitly involves judgments of some people and making them into the “Other.”
What happens in contrast when power is shared? When we connect with the full humanity of the other person? When we make choices and take actions from a place of being fully connected to our needs? This is what Nonviolent Communication ultimately calls for and elicits. And if our relationships change on an intra-personal level, they also ultimately must also impact societal structures, practices, and institutions.
The letter that I wrote:
First of all, I am not surprised to hear that this topic of “privilege” is a trigger for you, since I know it is for some people. In particular, there has been what I would consider an extensive discussion recently in the CNVC Certified Trainers email group on this topic.
What is interesting and stands out for me is how so many people are also excited and relieved about this topic, and that NVC Academy (in particular with the symposium) has brought it forward into a discussion. Each time I have sent the emails out about the NVC Academy fishbowls and the Symposium (Mary asked me to co-facilitate two), I have received numerous emails of gratitude and appreciation. I have had more of a response to these emails than to any other email I have sent out (this is over 15 years). And I don’t think it’s simply because of how the letters are written—although I like how the NVCA staff wrote them. I think it’s the topic, and opening this topic up. This is what I have heard gratitude about in particular.
You are the first to contact me directly with concerns and, again, I know there are some who are concerned from the CNVC Certified trainers list. At the core of the concerns, I hear anxiety around “privilege” is a label or evaluation, so out of alignment with NVC and its values. More, as a “label,” that this concept would get in the way of connection and understanding (rather than facilitate it). And, as related to all this, I hear concern that Marshall would not have approved of or wanted this term used. Ultimately, there is a desire to protect the integrity and practice of NVC and its further growth and impact in the world. I also think some simply want clarity: When you talk about privilege, what are talking about exactly? (To use NVC terms, what are the observations?)
I want to speak to these concerns.
Personally, I heard Marshall repeatedly speak of his vision and desire to see NVC as a form of social change (for examples, see the two interviews I conducted with him for The Cleveland Free Times and The Sun magazine). He also repeatedly referenced books such as Walter Wink’s The Powers that Be and Rianne Eisler’s, The Chalice and the Blade, both of which concern power in human society, how it has shifted over thousands of years, and how (in the case of Wink’s book) civil disobedience is a nonviolent challenge of power and its “habits” and structures.
For Marshall, I believe the compelling question for him was: How can all people and all beings’ needs matter and be held with care? As part of this (as illustrated by the book references above), he questioned and even challenged hierarchal structures, power over, and societal norms and expectations where power resided (his referring–with his characteristic humor—to corporations as “gangs” is one example of this). “Power-over” is a “label” or term that Marshall used repeatedly. This is what I see “privilege” referencing: “power-over” patterns on a societal level in how we relate to each other and all life.
That he decided to call the practice he developed “Nonviolent Communication” and saw NVC as a direct extension of Gandhi’s principles, is the ultimate example of his views and intentions. I don’t think I need to remind anyone that Gandhi was focused on civil disobedience, a radical way of practicing compassion to challenge power and power-over. Marshall saw NVC as an extension of these principles. In effect, NVC is Rosenberg’s “experiment” in direct action every day, in each conversation and interaction.
My sense is that there is pain, at least in the US, around access to power (i.e., resources and opportunities), including physical safety, health, housing, etc., and how to most effectively address and heal these imbalances. Internationally, I wonder: how has the impact of colonialism in the world been fully named or addressed? And how many nations are still now (decades later) recovering/rebuilding from the impact? How has reconciliation, healing, reparations, and responsibility (accountability) been taken?
We used to speak of “third world nations,” then it became considered more respectful to say, “developing nations.” In my opinion, the most accurate term is “formerly colonized nations.” Colonialism, slavery and racism (all inter-connected in my opinion) represent a system (what Foucault referred to as “power”—as manifested in institutions, practices, and structures) that show a continuing legacy of one group (based on some signifier, such as “race” or “gender” or “class” or “sexual orientation,” religion, etc.) holding greater value, rights, or power. When power becomes “codified”–held by certain groups and reinforced and maintained by societal norms, beliefs, laws, and institutions, this is what I would consider “privilege.” Increasingly, I see this privilege not only in how we treat each other; it’s reflected too in on our relationship as humans to the environment and other species.
What is power? From an NVC perspective, I would say it is the capacity to see your needs met. Privilege is a tag word for the societal practices, beliefs, and norms that both express and continue power continuing to be held—institutionally, culturally, and socially– by some groups. As surfaced in the NVCA symposium, these layers of power can be nuanced and complex. As Roxy Manning pointed out in her session, she’s aware that she has some (class) privilege by the nature of her having a higher degree (a Ph.D.) and also faces discrimination (harder access to being seen and seeing her needs met) as a woman and a person of color. Power, of course, is not just structural or institutional. We also have power in terms of internal resources. And this is a “power” that I also see NVC focused on developing.
I think if offered in a spirit of dialogue, with different members of our community having an opportunity to share observations (what they are seeing and hearing in the world—and what they have experienced), and hear each other and be heard, with the focus clearly on empathy (rather than debate), that it could be a powerful and transformative moment to consider and discuss privilege, including within the NVC community. I am inspired, for example, thinking about the post-Apartheid “truth and reconciliation” process that, in effect, created a nation-wide structure for restorative justice in South Africa.
I also am inspired by the growing call for reparations in the U.S., with students, as they did with fighting Apartheid in the U.S., taking the lead. As someone who has spent years researching and writing about Cultural Studies (my Ph.D. is in this area) it is very clear to me that the processes Marshall described as effective between people for healing and reconciliation (including from profound trauma) also has broader application between groups of people and trauma and imbalances on a larger, societal scale. NVC offers a frame for understanding power and privilege and how to shift it and transform it in radical ways—through empathy, love, and compassion.
I believe that specific choices/acts are connected/extend from beliefs, and patterns of beliefs, conscious or unconsciously. Maybe a more “NVC way” of referring to this is to say, “How does power and power-over function in the world today and what is the impact for us human beings? How do our beliefs–including our judgments and bias—support that power and its structures continuing? And how do our own fears get in the way of addressing these issues?” Again, I see “power” as the capacity we have to see our needs met. How might some people be choosing strategies (and I include speech as a strategy) that may be tragic attempts to meet their needs? (I would consider actions and words of the current president of the US in relation to women to be “tragic” in the way Marshall spoke about “violence being a tragic expression of unmet needs.”)
Trainers have also expressed concern at different times about Marshall’s desire and legacy for social change. Can NVC have a real impact regarding social change? Can empathy and people hearing each other create social change? I continue to believe that it can. My research in cultural studies (that examines trauma on societal and cultural levels) reinforces this belief for me that empathy can be transformative.
From this perspective, discussion of power, power over, and structural and codified power (i.e. privilege) offers a way to look at, address and hear each other’s pain around our needs being met and how we choose to use our resources moving forward in a way that is more life-serving for everyone. I have often pointed out that racism profoundly impacts people of color; we are all impacted by white-supremacy. Likewise, I believe that sexism and misogyny also impacts men and their capacity and freedom for full expression as human beings in life.
This is different than using “privilege” as a moral judgment or condemnation. I also don’t think Marshall used the term “power-over’ in this way either. He used “power-over” as a way to raise consciousness and awareness about particular ways that we as a species had come to behave, in ways that he did not find “life-serving” (another label he liked to use!). Overall, he asked, “How can we make life more wonderful?” (and “wonderful” is also an evaluation!). The most compelling and implicit question in all this (to my hearing) is: How am I using my power—and taking responsibility for it? How can I use my power–whatever power I have (internally, structurally, relationally) to a better life?
I share these thoughts with you out of a desire to see us further evolve as a species and for all life to continue to thrive on our planet. For me, this evolution of consciousness is intrinsically connected to our capacity to address the kinds of questions I raise here, even when painful and scary, uncomfortable and triggering. After all, it is when we are fully standing in the light that we see our shadows. And how we face our shadows will determine our future. I believe that looking at power and institutional power is one way of casting light.