Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Ask Joe: Keeping the peace while speaking the truth

Ask Joe: Keeping the peace while speaking the truth

Joe’s upcoming book, Fierce Civility: Transforming our Global Culture from Polarization to Lasting Peace, will launch on March 9, 2023. Stay tuned for more details.

Hi Joe,


I thought the question in the last article from Skeptical was interesting, but not what I have a problem with. I have so many people that I need to talk to about things that bother me but I wouldn’t think of doing it because I don’t want to make them mad. There are already so many angry people, why make it worse?

Let’s Chill

Hey Chill,

Interesting point. It’s great if your first impulse is to want to keep peace and avoid conflict. Don’t let that go. But not speaking your truth, when necessary, can cause you harm, harm to others, and even harm to the person you need to confront. Imagine seeing an injustice happening to someone else, and you say nothing. Imagine the amount of resentment that builds up when you don’t let people know how they are impacting you. This leads to creating mistrust and separation in your relationships, where we then tend to consciously or unintentionally harm each other. So, while we may avoid the short-term uncomfortable situations, we end up potentially creating more suffering.

I would like to share a story that happened to me:

Many years ago, when I was living in Holland, we had a circle of friends. We were very close. Suddenly one friend was not very present and when he was with us, he was not really himself. He kept asking us to lend him money. It became clear to the rest of us that he was using the money for his drug habit.

Because we all suffered from what I call “chronic niceness,” we kept giving him money (he was very persuasive). But we also noticed that we were losing him, also that we were all carrying a big amount of resentment, pain, fear and anger. Perfect Respectful Confrontation definition of Conflict.

But I felt like something needed to be done. Because I am usually the one who speaks out loud “what no one wants to talk about,” I decided to “confront” him. I did it with empathy and love, but also with firmness and setting of clear boundaries. I told him that I wasn’t going to give him money anymore.

This caused him to lash out and get aggressive. He refused to see me again and turned a few of our friends against me. This, of course, broke my heart. I doubted myself, and at times wished I didn’t confront him. But I also was able to stand strong in my conviction that my intention was to empower all of us. I didn’t judge him; I simply expressed my fear and concerns for his wellbeing and my desire to bring us all closer together. THAT reminder to myself was all I had to stay strong in my decision.

Then about 5 years later at a party, I ran into this friend. This was the first time we saw each other since that time and he looked good. After a lot of small talk, he shared with me that it was my conversation with him that helped him see how lost he was in the drugs and eventually chose to seek out help. He expressed his gratitude.

Not all situations will end this way, but it illustrates for me the importance of using both fierceness and civility to get to the root cause of our personal and societal problems in order to come to some kind of healing, reconciliation, common ground and the emergence of new solutions. At the moment, former president Jimmy Carter is on my mind and doing prayers for him and his family at this significant time in his life. I would like to share with you a quote of his that has inspired me for many years: “If you fear making anyone mad, then you ultimately probe for the lowest common denominator of human achievement.”

So, Chill, I invite you to consider that having those very uncomfortable conversations, with skill, compassion, courage and patience, are necessary for us to help each other become the best that we can be.

Learn more about Joe Weston and his work here. Make sure to c heck out Joe’s bestselling book Fierce Civility: Transforming our Global Culture from Polarization to Lasting Peace, published March 2023.

Have a question for Joe? Send an email to AskJoe@fulcrum.us.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less