Focus on Commonalities, not Differences

The Archangels Call Our Attention to Finding Common Ground

So many of us are understandably upset these days.  There is a lot of abuse of power to be seen, a lot of trampling of human and constitutional rights, and the aftereffects are nothing short of brutal and alarming.  People are dying.  It’s hard to believe that the scenes being shown on social media and the news reflect what is happening in our country right now.  If I didn’t know better, I’d swear they’d been filmed in another country known for violence breaking out between some other government and its people, rather than the United States, previously known for freedom and upholding the constitutional rights guaranteed to all citizens.

However, as bad as things are, there appears to be a development of unity around the country, something positive coming out of the negative.  People on both sides of the spectrum are agreeing on some important, big picture things, and a lot of it revolves around freedom and constitutional rights.  Actually, there is a lot we can agree on here, and although there are some who refuse to reconsider their original ideas and beliefs, I’d say more people are beginning to at least try to see things with a more open mind.

For example, the DHS keeps saying it’s taking out “the worst of the worst,” in terms of immigrants here illegally, off the streets in order to protect US citizens.  They say they are arresting and deporting rapists, murderers, child molesters, etc.  I think we can all agree, that we don’t want violent criminals free to roam the streets, whether they’re immigrants or citizens.  Whether someone was born here or whether they moved here, legally or illegally, we can agree that if they are violent criminals, we don’t want them free to commit more violence.  We want to feel safe.  That is common ground we can all share.  That is the big picture. 

So, we can agree that violent criminals should be taken off the streets – common ground – but can we also agree that the way in which ICE and DHS is going about this is unacceptable?  If so, that’s again, common ground.  Can we agree that protestors have the right to protest?  Can we agree that ICE agents who respond to non-violent protestors with violence is intolerable?  Can we agree that federal agents should be safe to carry out legal law enforcement?  Can we agree that when there’s a death of either an immigrant in custody or an American citizen who was protesting, there should be an honest, impartial, transparent, and thorough investigation into what happened?  Can we agree that some things need to change in terms of how the goal to remove “the worst of the worst” is being implemented?  If the goal is safety for American citizens, people should not be dying because of the government’s actions.

If we can agree on these things, that is all common ground, and that’s what we should be focusing on and uniting around, rather than whether or not immigration is good for the country or who people should or shouldn’t have voted for or which political party is better or all the other stuff out there about which we continue to disagree.  Just because we disagree on some things doesn’t mean we have to disagree on everything, and it doesn’t mean we have to be enemies.  We need to come together on the things we can agree about and work together to safeguard our rights and our freedom.  I asked the Archangels for some guidance in how to pursue common goals, and their response follows.

Question:  You’ve said that people have much more in common with each other than they have differences.  How can we focus on those commonalities without getting lost in the differences?

Answer:

Let us continue with this discussion on ICE and what is happening in Minnesota as a means of addressing this question.  First, it is helpful to try to set aside the emotions connected to these volatile situations as much as possible.  This is often difficult, but if you allow your emotions to overshadow your logic and demolish your calm, if you remain on the defensive and close your mind, nothing much is likely to be accomplished.  Second, commit to truly listening to what the other group or person is saying with an open mind, without comment or defense, without contradiction.  Just listen.  And while you listen, do not focus on the things you disagree with or wish to dispute.  Focus instead on the things you can agree on and make an effort to let them know that you agree with those points. 

For example, if they say they do not want violent criminals on the streets, tell them that you agree.  Just that you agree.  Do not launch into why what is happening is not addressing that point, just tell them that you do not want violent criminals on the streets either.  The time to point out things that are happening that do not support that statement will come later.  When you simply agree, they are likely to be surprised into silence, if they know you disagree on several other points, but you have expressed that you are in agreement at least on some things.  Hopefully, that will calm them to some degree and allow them to listen more acutely. 

When the opportunity presents itself, ask them if they agree that people should be able to protest peacefully against the government.  If they say no, a reminder that this is a constitutional right is appropriate.  Ask them if they believe constitutional rights should be upheld.  They are likely to accuse some protesters of protesting in unpeaceful ways, that ICE agents feel threatened and are entitled to protect themselves and stay safe.  Assuming you agree with this statement, tell them you are in agreement, that you are referring to peaceful protest, not violent protest, and that law enforcement absolutely should be safe and, like everyone, has the right to defend itself in order to avoid injury.  Just that.  Agree with whatever you can without defending anything else or expanding into accusation or complaint. 

Hopefully, you will have the opportunity to expand on these topics if things have remained calm and you refrain from accusations, casting blame, or in any way maligning anyone.  Those things escalate, rather than facilitate a discussion or disagreement.  If the listening continues, offer some further insight, perhaps what falls under peaceful as opposed to violent protest.  Do not make statements as much as ask questions.  For example, do not say, yelling and blowing whistles is peaceful demonstration.  Instead, ask them if they believe carrying signs, recording actions, yelling and blowing whistles constitutes violence against law enforcement.  Ask if those things should be answered with threats, pulling people out of cars, throwing people to the ground, removing them from the scene and detaining them, all of which has been captured on video.  Perhaps a reminder that those actions are legal and do not constitute a threat to the officers, however irritating they may be is appropriate.  Ask them if the right to protest in those ways should be taken away from people, and if so, what would be acceptable in their opinion.  Do not forget to pause and truly listen to their replies to your questions.  Again, focus on points of agreement.  Tell them you are trying to understand their point of view, and you are not about judging them. 

Can you both agree that both law enforcement agents and protestors should remain safe at all times?  Can you agree that physical force in response to yelling, filming, and blowing whistles is unacceptable, as long as the officers are not in any danger?  Can you agree that harming and detaining American citizens has nothing to do with attaining the original goal of removing violent immigrants from the streets?  Discuss what might be changed and done better on both sides of the protest lines. 

The idea is to facilitate conversation and find common ground, not to prove that you are right and they are wrong.  A conversation includes not only talking, but listening.  It should include asking questions as well as making statements.  If “facts” are stated that contradict the “facts” of which you are aware, concede that many sources on both sides of the controversy may not be genuine, honest, or indeed factual.  Most people can agree that truth is getting harder and harder to find.  Point out the bigger picture.  In this case, that might be that, although you are in support of removing violent criminals from the street, it should not be at the cost of constitutional rights, and this worthy effort could and should be done in more effective, less violent ways, and when it comes to loss of life and violence, whether with regard to law enforcement, immigrants, or citizens, it is not acceptable and should be avoided at all cost.  Most people can agree on these points, and if you find someone who cannot, then do not waste your time trying to convince them otherwise.  If they are not willing to listen to you, or if they go on the attack, leave. 

Most people have been convinced that those who disagree with them are enemies, and in most cases, this is not true, or at least it does not have to be.  There is almost always common ground that can be found and built upon if you seek it, rather than seek only to argue your point.  Know that you are more than likely in possession of wrong information, as are they, and do not take anything for granted at face value.  Those in power continue to do everything they can to cede separation, anger, and fear among the masses, including lying and misrepresenting the facts.  Their greatest fear is that you will unite, so they constantly work against this unity.  They know that the more unity that forms, the less power they will have. 

Final Thoughts

Assuming the sources I’ve read are correct, unfortunately, the vast majority of people being rounded up do not fit the description, “worst of the worst.”  A federal judge just stated that throughout the entire day of hearing cases in a Minnesota immigration court, out of all the cases she had presided over, only one person had pending charges and a history of violence.  The pending charge was possession of marijuana, and the history of violence was connected to a domestic violence case. 

One of the cases the judge dismissed was regarding a person who had entered the country legally at a port on entry, filled out the paperwork and received a green card in order to work here legally, and was attending court meetings in pursuit of citizenship, all legally.  The person made a mistake and failed to turn in one document and corrected that mistake, filing the missing paperwork five days past the deadline, and DHS, after a blanket sweep of picking up immigrants, was trying to deport this person for the five-day delay, and the judge dismissed the case.  Technically, the law had been broken when the paperwork was missing, but that mistake had been corrected in a timely manner, and all other laws had been followed.  The Justice department maintained the right to appeal the judge’s decision.

That’s just one case, but records show that of the 3000+ immigrants who have been swept up and detained, only between 20-25% have criminal convictions, so that’s between 75-80% who do not have a history of violence.  As a matter of fact, statistically speaking, it’s more likely that American citizens will commit a violent crime than it is that an immigrant will do so, which if you ask me, is a good reason not to take local police officers off the streets, so they can assist ICE, which is what the government wants.  Who will protect the locals if that happens?  Who will answer domestic violence calls, go to the scenes of accidents, address 911 calls, if the police force is required to assist ICE instead?  Extremely upsetting to me is the number of calls and complaints people are filing with the police department that do not pertain to immigrants or criminals, but are against federal agents for the violence they are unleashing against citizens.

That’s why the folks in Minnesota are so angry, because the violence and harassment happening against immigrants as well as citizens is not warranted and does not serve or address the government’s stated goal of the operation.  I doubt they would be upset if ICE was focusing on violent criminals, but that has not been the case.  You can argue that the protestors are the ones who are harassing the ICE agents, and there’s some truth in that, but there’s a difference between the harassment attached to peaceful protest and when law enforcement officers retaliate or harass American citizens who are exercising their constitutional rights.  Dealing with harassment from the public is supposed to be part of the training in law enforcement and is considered part of the job.  The replacement Trump sent to take over the Minneapolis debacle, Tom Homan, has confirmed that mistakes have been made and said he is currently changing the tactics and plan to be followed by ICE and Border Patrol agents.  Things looked as though they were beginning to deescalate, at least a little bit, until Trump made a statement last night contradicting what Homan had said about the adjustments he was planning on implementing.

At least, Homan admitting that mistakes have been made is a step in the right direction and a far cry from Noem, Miller, and Bovino, who blamed the victims who were killed by ICE agents for their own deaths and mislabeled them as domestic terrorists, as they continued to promote impunity for their agents and make false statements about the incidents. I have yet to hear any indication of sorrow or remorse from any of them with regard to the loss of human life. There was a clear message that right or wrong, they were right, and if people didn’t agree, they didn’t care, and they weren’t interested in finding or sharing the truth or in making any changes in what they were doing, regardless of the fallout.  They were not the least bit interested in trying to find common ground.

Some people are like that, not ready or interested in finding common ground.  There was a short article written by one woman I found on my news app who wanted to know why there was no outcry when Obama and Biden were deporting immigrants under the same laws Trump was using, that she couldn’t understand why people wouldn’t want rapists and murderers and child molesters taken off the streets, and where was the outcry for the victims of those worst of the worstcriminals. I don’t think she’d be interested in hearing that it’s not the laws as much as the methods for enforcing them that is the problem, or that most of the people being arrested are not violent criminals, or that the protestors in Minnesota, for the most part, are acting within their legal and constitutional rights.  She doesn’t realize that it’s not really enforcing immigration laws that is the problem, but rather the blatant disregard for human and constitutional rights to which they take exception.  She’s not ready to listen, and maybe she never will be, and that’s alright. I’m going to try not to judge her, and I’m not interested in engaging in a discussion with her.  What would be the point?

I don’t live anywhere near Minnesota, but I take exception to the same things they do, too.  Maybe someday she’ll simmer down enough to open her eyes, ears, and mind to the truth of what is happening out there.  Until then, I don’t have the time or the inclination to speak with her or those who are like her, who are more interested in being right than they are in learning and facing the truth.  I’d rather talk to someone who’s interested in finding common ground.

Tonight is the last Friday Night Meditation with the Archangels that address January’s intention of Truth.  We could all use a heavy dose of truth, even if it reveals things we are more comfortable not knowing.  If you are so inclined, just call on the Archangels, and they will hear you and gather up positive, loving energy offered to whoever needs it, and they will distribute for us where it most needs to go. 

I hope you have a perfectly peaceful weekend, and to those in Minnesota, citizens, immigrants, and law enforcement, stay safe.  I’m sending you lots of love.

Blessings, all.