Once again I am writing about the divisions in this country, fully believing that a nation or any institution divided against itself cannot stand.  I am convinced the divisions between regions, and political parties in this country are the biggest threat this country has faced since the Civil War.
 
Yes, we’ve had discrimination and divisions in the past.  We’ve had poverty in the past.  In the past, if someone didn’t like what was happening around them, they packed up and moved west.  Finally, they reached the Pacific Ocean and there is no place left to go.  Perhaps it is time those settlers turned around and decided that the problems they left behind need to be solved.
 
Solving the problems left behind when people moved west, has become much more complicated than when we were a rural agricultural society.  We all are influenced by the same corporate-controlled mass media, which gets rich off of promoting controversy and strife.  Our military industrial complex gets rich off of promoting fear.  False prophets get rich off of promoting hate in God’s name. We are bombarded by these messages promoted to us as truth, and it is hard for those who absorb the cultural/media story to see beyond hiding behind closed doors while armed to the teeth.
 
I have a certain compassion for those who live with such fear and turmoil in their lives.  However, those who embrace the fear, conflict and hate are also destroying the country I love.
 
As a fifth generation west coast resident, I still have the urge to turn and walk away from the drama. Where would I go?  This is my home. What choices do people like me have?

I have a friend who is quite an intrepid and brave individual.  She confessed that she has been sick over the political climate in this country.  She finally concluded that the rhetoric surrounding our political situation was triggering her trauma related to her abusive marriage and divorce.  Is that what we have in this country, an abusive marriage of people from different backgrounds constantly fighting over who gets what rights and resources? Is divorce the only answer?
 
Some days, I wonder is it time to have the discussion that terminates the United States of America?  Is it time for the final amendment to our constitution that allows the separate regions to go their separate ways because of irreconcilable differences?”  Separation is the easy answer.  I’d like to make at least one last campaign to try to reconcile our differences. 
 
At this time, I fully believe that if an amendment to the constitution were introduced expelling Washington, Oregon, California and Hawaii from the union, some states would happily ratify that amendment.  Some of our leadership would advocate for getting rid of us.  Some of the false prophets would tell their faithful that God will bless them if they get rid of those sinful west coast states. Would such an amendment sound a wake-up call to those who say they love their country but will only do so on their own terms? 
 
I don’t believe divorce is the only answer.  I don’t think civil war is the answer.
I’ve seen some that advocate a civil war to make a final end to those who are different from themselves.  Civil war is unthinkable. 
 
The alternative to war or separation involves embracing a humble attempt to communicate with each other, to find common ground, and accept that different is not bad or scary. The humble approach may be too big a step for some people.  We don’t need all people.  We need enough people, who see the value of a Unites States, to put down their pride and say that despite our differences we will work together to accept each other as people with inalienable rights.  We will approach our problems as just what they are, challenges to be solved without angst and drama. We will embrace each other as equals with equal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

I have been struggling to figure out why this country is so divided when most of us want about the same things, food, shelter, and healthy communities for our kids.  Instead of working toward common goals I see name-calling, ridicule and blatant racism. 
 
It is true that we have different ways of interpreting our surroundings.  I’ve been talking about those who use gut feelings and intuition to make decisions.  Those people are at odds with the people who use data, facts and figures to interpret their surroundings.  We have on one hand a group of people who will use a dictionary as the basis for defining what a word means and on the other hand a group who define words based on their emotional appeal or shock value.
 
So, what do the data users see when they look at our POTUS?  Why don’t we see him as a benefactor who is going to Make America Great again?  Why aren’t we thrilled with the idea that he is bringing good jobs back to this country?  Why don’t we see how much he has done already?
 
Data users want facts and figures, then we are going to search out what is included in those facts and figures.  We process long chains of cause and effect to analyze how that data impacts other data.  Yes, it is possible to do this.  Some people find this easy.
 
Let me use a specific example to show the difference as to how the gut instinct people view a policy different from the data people.  Let’s look at what is called The Travel Ban.  Our gut instinct people are quite happy.  Someone is doing something to make them safer. The laws are being enforced.  No undocumented people are coming in from those strange places.
 
The data person looks at the same travel ban and nearly has a heart attack.  First, we see that this new ban is pretty much the same as what we’ve been doing-not much new about it, except all the vetting that has been put in place over the past few years has been disregarded.  Data people understand that to board a plane, a traveler must have the appropriate Visa, passport and ticket in hand. Those documents are checked before boarding a plane. Data people know that to get the appropriate visa an application must be completed.  In some cases, the traveler must be interviewed. The traveler must have some indication of their activities on this end.  These are the standards that we had in place.  They vary from country to country. The travel ban wasn’t so much a change in who can come here from where, but an invalidation of previous standards and protocols for traveling. 
 
The second part of the travel ban that drove data people up the wall was that the invalidation of previous standards and protocols happened after people were in the air.  People who had done all the necessary paperwork to get on those planes to come here were then detained with the threat of deportation when they landed. 

Oh My Gosh!  How many of our basic laws were broken when those people were detained?  Unreasonable search and seizure?  Yes.  Incarceration without due process?  Yes, being detained in a waiting room is incarceration if you are held against your will.   Ex post Facto application of the law? Yes. 

​While the gut-feelings people were feeling safe, the data people were horrified at the total disregard for the laws of this country. Historically, rule of law is what allows a civilization to develop and function safely, and rule of law just got deported in the travel ban.  
 
We are inclined to say, either you enforce the law or you don’t.  The Travel Ban had the effect of breaking several existing laws.  Data people do not accept the notion that violating existing laws is okay if it makes someone feel good.
 
Data users also have a nasty tendency to look beyond the immediate issue and ask, “How necessary was this?  How often have refugees, immigrants, scholars, doctors and business professionals from these countries endangered our citizenry?”  Never?
 
Will this have an effect on future travel?  People from other countries say they are cancelling travel plans to come here.  We’ve become ineligible to host international sporting events.  Girl Guides from Canada say they won’t come here.  We hear stories about people cancelling travel plans.  Can we find data to back up these allegations?  Those in the travel and tourism industries are posting numbers that show fewer people are planning to travel to the US than there were at this time last year.  Really, it’s a bit early to be certain that our travel and tourism industries have been hurt by the travel ban, but some numbers indicate that it’s very possible the travel ban will hurt our economy and people in the travel industry will lose their jobs, but those who harbor a vague sense of insecurity in their gut are happy that someone is protecting them even if that protection results in suffering for many others and the loss of the protection of our own laws.
 
In the end, we see the data users going a wee bit crazy over seeing our laws violated.  When we complain, the gut-instincts people have a fight or flight response over the threat of having their security blanket stolen.  Can we ever cross this divide to work together for common goals? How?

Miss Crawford: “Oh! I know nothing of your furlongs, but I am sure it is a very long wood, and that we have been winding in and out ever since we came into it; I must speak within compass.”
 
“We have been exactly a quarter of an hour here,” said Edmund, taking out his watch. “Do you think we are walking four miles an hour?”
 
“Oh! do not attack me with your watch.  A watch is always too fast or too slow.  I cannot be dictated to by a watch.”
 
                                    Mansfield Park By Jane Austen
 
I really do believe I am starting to understand my friends on both sides of the aisle.  I have many wonderful friends, who like the delightful Miss Crawford above, know they have walked a great distance and have no desire to be attacked by a watch.
 
While Jane Austen describes the phenomenon well, my data-loving friends will need a different paradigm for understanding our societal communication problems in a manner that leads to functional solutions.  Let’s think quantum physics, here.  We have populations from two overlapping universes trying to interact on a single plane.  Each side brings their reality to the table.  Now, I am convinced that the dimension we are living in can only remain stable if elements from both universes that contribute to this dimension are employed.  However, the data and facts that one side employs have absolutely no meaning to the other side.
 
Because the Miss Crawfords of this world have no use for data and facts, the data-lovers tend to believe the others are embracing lies.  Of course the Miss Crawfords know how they feel. Their fear or happiness is not a lie and how dare those other people call their whole universe a lie. 
 
So in one universe, data doesn’t exist in a replicable quantifiable form.  The only facts that are valid are the ones that confirm their own feelings that something is not quite right.  Measurements, like the watch, are manipulations, representing little more than an attack. 
 
How on earth are we going to surmount this divide?  We could be like Edmund and put our watches away and indulge those who have no use for them.  This didn’t work out well for Edmund and led Miss Crawford into troubled circumstances.  We must communicate.  The first step to overcoming any problem is to admit that something isn’t working and will never work using current methods.  Data-lovers might just as well put away their watches and think up better ways to communicate with the aliens.  As for the Miss Crawfords, they might do well to admit that everybody is different and different people see different things and have different priorities, histories, and feelings. 
 
So far so good, we are now facing each other with the watches put away and with a determination to recognize that we are all have different priorities and feelings. 
 
Shall we try step two?  What is step two?  Some therapists have insisted that step two consists of “I feel” statements such as, “When you start talking numbers and science to me I feel threatened and invalidated.”  (Stopped writing here to laugh) This doesn’t really work very well.  The data person can play the roll.  “Oh you are saying that my science answers are not what you need.”  Sounds lovely.  Sounds like we are getting somewhere.  Not really.  This exercise strokes the Miss Crawfords, but leaves the data-lovers trying hard not to roll their eyes and use the F… word.
Step two must meet the needs of both parties and that is why the whole divide exists.  Data lovers can play the “I feel” formula.  After all, it is just a formula. However, those who process the world through data don’t get anything except frustration out of the exercise.  “When you don’t slow down when I tell you the speed limit is sixty, I feel like you are a dangerous idiot,” doesn’t really fit the model
 
In looking at the Miss Crawfords to try to find a step two, we discover that basically, they seem to be a rather fear-filled group.  I can only wonder how they feel when we scream the CO2 level exceeds 400 parts per million.  It’s never been that high before!  The numbers mean nothing to Miss Crawford, but the sense of urgency is going to send her running toward her familiar universe where problems are solved by a hero, or by talking about feelings, or thinking positive thoughts.  Soothing mantras are the way to solve problems.  The big hero assures Miss Crawford, “I’ll protect you Little Lady.  Just let me get a bigger gun.” Curiously, Miss Crawford doesn’t kick the hero in the groin and march off to buy an electric car, she gives him the money for a bigger gun to protect her.  We really need to communicate with this gal.
 
Another problem of communicating with Miss Crawford is that she has dozens of suitors, who understand her vulnerability and use it to seduce her.  The data-lovers have serious competition for her attention.  Of course those other suitors are just after her money.  She knows this and can sidestep the worst of the lot, usually, but she will in the end choose security in whatever way she interprets it. 
 
Step two then becomes constructing a path toward security that makes sense to Miss Crawford while a dozen other suitors are telling her to go the other way.  Curiously, I think Jane Austen may offer us some answers in the form of Fanny Price, the scientist among her peers.  Fanny showed the way.  She lived a life free from fear.  She loved wholeheartedly.  I suspect that the only way to reach the Miss Crawfords of this world is to take their hands and show them how safe and wonderful this dimension is when we build it with both science and heart. I don’t see how to do this using mass media, maybe there is a way, but I do see how we can reach out the Miss Crawfords in our families, schools, churches and among our facebook friends, and say, “See how beautiful this is.  Come with me.  I’m not afraid.”
 
As for the Miss Crawfords who do not care to be attacked by measurements that are always either too fast or too slow, I suggest you read Mansfield Park.  It is available in video form.  My book Something About Maudy was written to be an assuring read about building community to solve problems.  The Miss Crawfords will find strength in the arts.  Miss Crawford, in order to pursue step two, set aside your political concerns and pursue the arts.