The group was a bit wary at first as we sat in a circle balancing plates. However, everyone soon warmed to the challenge. There is plenty of prejudice around: religion, race, politics, profession, ideas, sexual orientation, even dress–they all provide plenty of fodder for judgment. And often the only choices, in practice, are to swallow anger and hurt politely or to engage in an angry harangue. Neither seems to do much good.

The stories picked up steam – a professional slight at an academic conference, a woman whose comments were simply ignored, and a man who was startled to hear a loud voice shouting “murderer’ in the street, only to realize that it was aimed at him-- he was wearing a fur hat.

The leader of this exercise was Laura Chasin, philanthropist and conflict resolution professional. She has long been deeply troubled by the polarization she sees around both politics and religion in the United States and wondered whether therapy techniques for working with conflict might be useful in the public arena. The Public Conversations Project is the result. This small institution, based in Watertown, Mass., has worked to get beyond stereotypes and establish the human contact that might allow conversation.

Across town, Anas Shallal, originally from Iraq, now Virginia, was also talking about a technique to open the way to dialogue. He was addressing the Friday Morning Group at the World Bank, which wrestles with questions about values in development. Shallal’s efforts, which started with after-theater discussions among Jews and Muslims concerned about the Middle East, have grown over eight years into what he calls “Peace Cafes”. Shallal is a man of many talents-- artist, restaurateur,, entrepreneur--and he seeks to bring them together in a unique fashion.

Both events featured “techniques” to bridge tense relationships, generally among people who start with negative images of the “other”. But both are driven by concern about how polarized our public debates have become. The Public Conversations Project began with the subject of abortion, Peace Cafes with Arab-Israeli tensions. I was intrigued by the similarities in philosophy, the differences in approach, and the basic message that true dialogue can chip away at prejudice and anger.

Religion and politics often unleash strong passions that can get out of hand. But the traditional advice to avoid those topics at the dinner table results in a lot of missed opportunities.
Both Public Conversations and Peace Cafes are part of a growing body of little heralded efforts to use scripted techniques to address conflict, one person at a time, from the bottom up. It’s an exciting field, well worth watching.