Then we see that a polarized political issue that seems to be an apparent paradox on a lower level actually resolves into a greater wisdom on a higher level. George Hegel described this approach over a century ago as:  “thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis.” From this perspective, we can craft more effective and creative public policies.

     The philosophical dividing line between the liberal and conservative positions is a disagreement over whether social problems are caused by economic factors or by a breakdown in individual values, and thus whether government or individual solutions are best. Conservatives argue that the problem is with values, and so see little benefit, for example, in the government spending more on the poor. Liberals argue that having good values doesn’t help if there is not equal economic opportunity for all with a supportive social environment . 

     The policy deadlock in Congress is based on trying to separate economics and values from each other, with neither conservative nor liberal admitting any wisdom in the other’s perspective. For example, although the poor may suffer from some of their values and lifestyle choices (such as smoking), the poor also suffer from inadequate diet and a lack of access to health care, both of which can be helped by government spending. Liberals accuse conservatives of coercive moralism, and conservatives accuse liberals of moral relativism that allows evil to flourish.

     Both liberals and conservatives promote important values:  The liberal left especially promotes values of generosity, tolerance and inclusiveness.  The conservative right especially promotes values of self-help, hard work and initiative.  In recent years, conservatives have been very vocal in lobbying for religious values on issues such as abortion, gay rights and school prayer.  Liberals promote government regulation in the economic sphere, but freedom in the personal sphere, such as the right to free choice on abortion or sexual orientation.  Conservatives promote freedom in the economic sphere, but government regulation in the personal sphere.  Conservatives used to promote states’ rights in relation to federal regulation, but not when it relates to key issues for them, such as gay marriage. Here are some of their opposing views on each side of an issue:

Liberal                                                            Conservative                                               

Government is the solution                                Government is the problem

Corporate sector is the problem                        Corporate sector is the solution

Strengthening of federal government                  Protection of states’ rights in most areas

Regulation of the economy                                Freedom of the economy

Freedom of cultural and sexual expression         Regulation of cultural and sexual expression

Protection of the environment                            Protection of business

Protection through equality                                Protection of rewards

Governmental redistribution of  wealth               Governmental protection of private wealth

Economic solutions for crime                             Law and order solutions for crime

Government spending for disadvantaged            Personal charity for disadvantaged

Promotion of social justice                                Promotion of economic opportunity

Affirmative action for minorities                         Self-initiative by minorities

Encouragement of collective responsibility         Encouragement of individual responsibility

Judicial activism                                                Judicial restraint

Right to choose                                                 Right to life

Separation of Church and State                         Right to prayer in public institutions

     President Kennedy’s Inaugural Address was so immensely popular because it was a masterful synthesis of liberal and conservative perspectives, emphasizing, for example, collective and personal responsibility, peace and strength.

     Public Conversations Project in Boston discovered that a first step in finding common ground or a higher synthesis on an issue is to refrain from polarizing rhetoric and personal attacks and stereotypes of the other side.  Toning down the rhetoric is critical and is also better politics, as it reaches more people, they found

     A key approach in synthesizing liberal and conservative polarities is learning to really listen to those with opposing positions, to find the grain of truth in each.  For example, Project Victory, based in Palo Alto, California, organized a “mediated dialogue” at the Los Alamos Labs in Berkeley for over 350 peace activists and nuclear weapons designers – the entire spectrum from right to left – asking people to enter a dialogue with a willingness to be changed by it. Because people really listened to each other, and weren’t preoccupied with making their own case of trying to prove the other person wrong, they each discovered new insights. A key step was to explore the interest or goals behind the different positions, and find common goals in their joint quest for peace.

     Another technique for helping people transcend the left/ right polarization, used by Search for Common Ground in Washington, D.C., is to show both groups their own and their opponent’s propaganda films.  Each side may suddenly realize that they both employ the same exaggerated portrayals to evoke fear of their opponent and to smugly suggest that their own side has all the answers.  When supporters of both disarmament and strong defense sat together to view each other’s films, for example, it was harder for each side to hold onto certainty of its own position and act smug about having all the answers.

     A synthesis of the conservative position of “right to life” and the liberal “freedom of choice” has been developed by Network for Life and Choice convened by Search for Common Ground. This approach honors the values on both sides-- the sacredness of both mother and fetus – rather than continuing the emotionally devastating focus on abortion. Instead of arguing about exactly when life begins, and whether abortion is murder, they instead reframed the debate to include the causal level (conception), and so found common ground.  Both sides wanted to prevent unwanted pregnancies, so they agreed to work together on promoting conscious conception and pregnancy prevention through The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.  Both sides also found a whole range of options on which they could work together, such as promoting adoption, reducing infant mortality rates, and preventing violence around abortion clinics.

     The Character Education Partnership, based in Washington, D.C., has created a synthesis of the conservative interest in teaching values in the schools and the liberal concern for inclusiveness and diversity.  Through the use of a common ground, consensus building approach among teachers, students, administrators, parents and the community, diverse schools from Berkeley, California to Kansas City, Kansas have come up with a similar list of values to teach, such as honesty, integrity, courage, compassion, etc.

     A synthesis is also emerging from the conservative interest in promoting school prayer, and the liberal interest in separation of Church and State and sensitivity to the diversity of religious expression. One approach is to allow a few minutes of silence to begin each school day (where students can pray or meditate or just do nothing quietly).  A second approach is an educational one that is more inclusive than presenting only Christian prayers.  This approach develops understanding and tolerance, as students take turns researching and presenting the major beliefs and prayers of different religions (as well as of the non-religious humanist tradition).  With each presentation, students can either join in the prayers or just remain silent. 

    Some effective models of synthesis are emerging in many non-profit organizations around the world.  For example, the liberal urge to help the poor and the conservative emphasis on self-help and entrepreneurship has been synthesized by organizations such as FINCA and the Grameen Bank.  These organizations give the poorest of poor in the developing world very small loans to start businesses and then depend on peer relations to pay them back, so the next member of the peer group can take out a loan.  They have a surprising 98% payback rate. 

     Conservative principles of individual ownership and liberal principles of central ownership have been synthesized in the model of worker-owned cooperatives, such as the highly successful Mondragon cooperatives in Spain with over 20,000 workers.  Mondragon businesses produce major appliances and have their own banks, schools and hospitals.

     Liberal and conservative are values are also synthesized in the Social Investment movement – investing in companies that express good social values such as providing good employee benefits, protecting the environment or donating a percentage of profits to their communities. “Doing well by doing good” is their slogan.

     The conservative approach to reducing crime through tougher laws and more police, and the liberal approach of providing economic aid to crime ridden areas and rehabilitating criminals has been synthesized into developmental approaches—restraint of negative behavior in the present and education in positive behavior for the future. One example is the Restorative Justice movement where victims and offenders are brought together on a one to one basis for reconciliation.  After the victims hear the offenders’ personal experiences, and the offenders face their actual victims and hear about the pain they have personally caused, tremendous breakthroughs and forgiveness often result.  The offenders frequently make voluntary restitution, and recidivism is lowered.

    In the polarization between protecting the environment and protecting a free market economy, new solutions are emerging.  A synthesis of the liberal environmentalist’s knowledge of energy-efficient ways to create products and the conservative industrialist’s knowledge of cost-effective production techniques is reflected in the growing new “market approach” to environmental problems.  This synthesis includes approaches such as emissions trading (companies can trade emissions credits based on maximum pollution allowed); extended product liability (producers must recycle their products); performance based regulations; and the inclusion of environmental impact costs in business accounting practices.

     A synthesis of conservative and liberal economic approaches can temper free market capitalism with other values such as community, equity and compassion. Balancing market efficiency with social justice could create a better society.  Tax incentives could be created for corporations to expand the bottom line from mere profit to profit and values (such as greater employee benefits, “flex time,” or protection of the environment.)  Competitive markets could be balanced by government policies that provide workers with access to job training, health care and transportation.  Or the rewards of a market economy could be redistributed through a progressive consumption tax that encourages investment and assures a minimum standard of living for all. The government could create greater opportunities for the poor, but those who receive benefits would then be required to live up to certain obligations and give something back to society.

    The “communitarian” or civil society movement balances the rights of the individual with the interests of society as a whole, and promotes a return to values and morality fostered by community organizations. The non-profit sector could be strengthened through increasing tax credits for donations from individuals and corporations and for volunteering.

     To create a truly new politics that transcends left and right, new ways of thinking are needed.  There are, as yet, no complete roadmaps.  An expansion in consciousness is required and a developing ability to transcend apparent paradoxes and enfold them into a higher synthesis that will truly solve our social problems.  An identification with the good of the whole rather than with just our own group’s needs will take us far in creating a new approach. A spirit of goodwill towards those with opposing views, a win/win rather than win/lose approach, a release of self-righteousness, and a compassionate, healing spirit are the keys to this new politics.