Civility, Conflict and the Power of Disagreement with Michael Lee, Director of the Civility Initiative

In this episode of Speaking of…College of Charleston, we talk to Michael Lee, professor of communication and Director of the Civility Initiative. Lee has been an influential figure at the college since 2002, focusing on political communication. His research delves into political branding, identity, and strategic communication, earning him numerous awards. Lee is getting ready to launch season two of his podcast When We Disagree, which is focused on powerful, human stories about arguments, conflicts and disagreements.

The podcast is a guest driven show, and Lee says the goal is “to have a bunch of people from various walks of life telling a bunch of stories about the conflicts they've had. The conflicts they’ve wanted to have and the conflicts they’ve deeply, deeply avoided.”

Conflict is an embodied experience. “Think about how you feel during a conflict. Your blood pressure is rising, your brain is flooded with what some psychologists call the devil's cocktail, the combination of cortisol and adrenaline at the same moment," says Lee. "And so, the ways in which we can be mindful of how we show up during that embodied experience and the way it makes us feel can really help us navigate difficult conflicts in our lives.”

The Civility Initiative was launched in 2023 and features panels, debates, speakers and workshops that promote communal engagement and healthy disagreement. Upcoming events include the film screening of UNDIVIDE US, a film about polarization and free speech. The film challenges the idea that citizens who disagree are not capable of civil conversation and demonstrates the truth that, even in our differences, the American experiment is still alive and well. Ben Klutsey, executive director of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, stars in this film and will lead a Q&A discussion following the screening.

Lee offers practical tips for navigating difficult conversations, particularly in the context of the impending election. He emphasizes the importance of curiosity, empathy, and the embodiment of communication as tools for navigating conflicts, especially in highly polarized environments.

Resources from this episode:

• We Are Not One People: Secession and Separatism in American Politics Since 1776
• When We Disagree
• Civility Initiative Events calendar
• Uncivil Agreement, How Politics Became Our Identity by Lilliana Mason

Transcript

[00:00:00] On this episode of Speaking of College of Charleston, we talked to Michael Lee, Professor of Communication, Director of the Civility Initiative, and host of the podcast, When We Disagree, which is about to launch its second season. [00:00:20] Lee has been teaching and writing about political communication And rhetoric at the college.

[00:00:25] Since 2002, his research focuses on political branding, political identity, strategic communication, and audience positioning in American politics. His work has earned over a [00:00:40] dozen awards. including five National Book Awards for his first book, Creating Conservatism, Post War Words That Made an American Movement.

[00:00:51] His latest book is called We Are Not One People, Separatism and Secession in American Politics Since [00:01:00] 1776. He's regularly invited to speak about his research at universities across the country. We're so grateful that Lee made time to come to the studio And share with us how curiosity about diverse perspectives can lead to learning and growth.

[00:01:18] Mike, thanks so much [00:01:20] for joining us today on Speaking Up. Um, you have one season of the podcast, One We Disagree, under your belt and are about to launch season two. You started the podcast because. In a previous conversation, you said you were fascinated by arguments and wanted to know more about why people have arguments [00:01:40] and why they fear and avoid them.

[00:01:43] Did the conversations that you had with guests answer those questions. Um, and if, and what are you looking forward to or what can listeners expect to hear in season two? Uh, yeah, those are great questions and thanks for having me. Um, the podcast, when we [00:02:00] disagree, I think is at its best when it can showcase the variety of conflicts in people's lives and the variety of ways that conflicts affect our minds, our bodies, and the variety of behaviors we have around them.

[00:02:13] And so, in short, I'd like a bunch of people from various walks of life on telling [00:02:20] a bunch of stories about the conflicts they've had. The conflicts they've wanted to have and the conflicts they've deeply, deeply avoided. And so of the 36 episodes in season one, I'd say we did a great job of featuring a variety of people from all around the country, telling stories about politics and [00:02:40] philosophy and professional behavior, workplace fights, family fights, um, age ranges, lots of different demographics on the show, which is exactly what I wanted it to be.

[00:02:50] But I also, it's a guest driven show. It's not like Mike's musings or me just holding court about what I want to talk about. It's very guest driven and I don't really [00:03:00] farm for stories to find people who seem to have a unique voice or people who want to share. And they get to talk about what they want to talk about.

[00:03:08] And I ask them questions and listen as best as possible to hear them out about their life experience for all of us. And so when we get an aggregate total of like 36 episodes and we get a good [00:03:20] cross section of conflicts, that's great. I'm really happy to do that. But I mean, theoretically, since it's guest driven, we could have had 36 of very similar stories about mom and dad.

[00:03:29] Right. Did you see with all the 36 different conversations, were there some common threads? Yeah, yeah. And actually, the show is getting put into a [00:03:40] few college classrooms, both here at the College of Charleston, as well as around the country. And so, what I'm doing is I'm pairing like episodes together. So, not that I farmed it this way, but it worked out that we had two very different.

[00:03:55] So one was a younger student who had a conversation about conspiracy theory that he was [00:04:00] confronting a friend of his was kind of down this rabbit hole, and he didn't know what to do about it. And then we had a guy who's written three books about civility and conspiracy theories and studies arguments for a living, had to kind of break up with a friend because she was so far down a rabbit hole that he couldn't kind of stand to be around.

[00:04:17] Some of the rank things that she was saying and he couldn't pull her [00:04:20] back from it. And so he was a kind of at his wits end. He spent his whole life studying argument and conflict deescalation and seeing the other side and putting yourself in other people's shoes. And he's up against the limits of the things he spent his life doing.

[00:04:34] And so that kind of frustration, whereas the first story was a story about finding common ground amidst this [00:04:40] weird disagreement over conspiracy theories. We had two different episodes accidentally again, but one was kind of like, Arguments are better when they're reasonable and rational and everybody just settles down.

[00:04:50] And then we had another one that was like, no, emotion is inevitably a part of the human experience of conflict. And we should embrace that not to take it to a, an illogical [00:05:00] or violent limit, but just to say, the reason we care about these things is because we're emotionally invested. We're not computers and we don't have an on off switch for our emotions.

[00:05:09] My point is we had lots of these kinds of paired episodes on reason, emotion, or conspiracy theories. And those are getting linked up into. trainings I'm doing at retirement communities here in [00:05:20] town or college classrooms are using these or student groups and RAs and SGA types. And yeah, so it's been a fun kind of way, not just to find an audience nationally, but also to integrate it into the curriculum at places you don't expect in places you do like college classrooms and high schools, but also.

[00:05:38] retirement communities who are [00:05:40] interested in whether we can be nicer to each other as a country. Yeah. And it's, and it's fascinating to me that it's such a universal why it's something that, that we all struggle with so much. It's like, weren't, weren't we supposed to learn that in kindergarten, you know, like how to have a, how to have a [00:06:00] disagreement and, um, It's, it's fascinating to me that it's something that we, our culture feels so kind of crippled by.

[00:06:09] Yeah, Argument's such an embodied experience and with the show for sure. Yeah, say more about that because you, you also talked about the body a little bit. So say more about that. I just mean in a sense of the whole civility [00:06:20] initiative. In the, the podcast specifically is really dedicated to the study and pursuit of understanding around fight and flight issues.

[00:06:28] So fight issues being cancellation, violence, bigotry, et cetera. Red state, blue state collision antagonism. And then flight issues being more [00:06:40] insidious, withdrawal, isolation, alienation, silence, conflict avoidance, even media echo chambers, just us not hearing each other or seeing each other, acknowledging one another.

[00:06:50] And so the more we flee from one another, the easier it is to demonize one another. So fight, flight begets fight, but it cuts the other way too, because the more we [00:07:00] fight with each other, the easier it is to flee from one another. So. fight also begets flight. I think I got that right. But I think everybody's following what I'm saying.

[00:07:07] Yes. In any case, the podcast really wanted to talk about the ways in which people felt not just emotionally, but physically during conflict. Think about yourself during a conflict, you can feel your blood [00:07:20] pressure rise, you can feel numbness in your hands, you can feel your heart sort of, It's beat slowly but hard or maybe you get into a flight scenario where you're at 150 160 beats per minute Your heart's beating out of your chest.

[00:07:32] Your brain is flooded with what some psychologists call the devil's cocktail, right? It was talking about cortisol and adrenaline at the same time [00:07:40] and tons of fears about that. Different areas of your brain are operating, right? We're not talking about prefrontal cortex, actually, but more amygdala based thinking.

[00:07:49] We have egocentric pursuits, like we don't want to be proven wrong in public. And we have fears around excommunication and exile and losing relationships. And so it [00:08:00] can feel very kind of existential, right in a in a physical kind of a way. So that's what I mean when I say Argument is an embodied experience, but you know, at the same time of communication is an embodied experience.

[00:08:12] And so what we're doing right now, right. It's like nodding, looking at one another, making eye contact, sitting around the table, conversing. [00:08:20] And so the ways in which we can be mindful of the way we show up during the, that embodied experience and the way it makes us feel can really help us navigate difficult conflicts in our lives.

[00:08:30] So it almost seems like, I mean, I'm thinking of. The conversations with therapists, you know, but it, but it almost feels like the first thing that you should do is, is like stop [00:08:40] and and get your calm your body down out of the, um, the sympathetic and I, yeah, parasympathetic. Yeah, parasympathetic. Exactly.

[00:08:50] Yeah, because you can't have anyway, that's, um. Um, I will, I will get us back on track here, but , that's relevant. The Vegas number, certainly relevant. There's gonna be a lot of great. Yeah, there, [00:09:00] there's, you're launching in a couple weeks, season two, so yeah, about a week before the election is what we're shooting for.

[00:09:06] Yeah. And so we'll have similar structure, two episodes a week. It'll run for four months, give or take. Try to get to season one. Had 36 episodes and concluded on July 3rd, and this one will give in the same area, 30 to 40 [00:09:20] episodes. Um, and we have a pretty full slate already, and so we need to add some. And you don't know what, what the argument is going to be ahead of time, or do you know?

[00:09:28] No, like I said, I don't, I don't story farm. Yeah. Um, and. Two things. One, I'm a terrible actor, so I know that if I know in advance what you're [00:09:40] going to say, then it'll just sound disingenuine, right? Because you'll know the question in advance and I'll know what you're going to talk about. And second, I want it to be a record of an authentic exchange between two human beings in a moment about a conflict, about a powerful memory that has enchanted somebody [00:10:00] or haunted them for weeks, months, even years or decades.

[00:10:04] And then, and then third, I really want to make sure that I hear the story in the way the audience hears the story. And so if I have a kind of like prior warning about what you're going to say, if there's gaps [00:10:20] in the story or we need more detail, I might just be subconsciously filling in those gaps and not asking the questions that I think need to be asked to make the conversation flow for the guests, for the audience who has never met me or.

[00:10:32] Or these people. So I always tell guests and, um, this is sort of a canned line. And so I just, I can feel myself repeating myself, but [00:10:40] I just say, don't tell me what you're going to say. Come in with a conflict that is meaningful to you that you're ready to talk about in public and talk to a stranger on the streets of Seattle who you just met and said, wow, do I have a story for you and shape it for that audience?

[00:10:53] I love it. And then I just sit here and I. Use my kind of like debate training. I just flow what they say. So [00:11:00] I just take a written record of everything they're saying. And then as they're talking, I just write questions to each point. So you made a point, and then I write down three questions, you make another point, I write down two or three questions.

[00:11:10] And then when you sum it up after, let's say you've talked for 90 seconds, then I just look at my sheet and try to figure out what's the best question where we stopped. Have you ever been [00:11:20] Stumped like has somebody ever come in and told us an argument story that you're sitting there going like, Oh my God, I don't know what to say.

[00:11:28] Like, uh, mostly it's too much. It's, I haven't been stumped in terms of freezing, but I haven't been stumped in terms of like, I'm not really sure where to begin because that was a lot and kind of amazing. One episode in particular [00:11:40] stands out with. A professor on our campus, as a matter of fact, Sandy Slater.

[00:11:43] And I said as much during the podcast, like I, that was a really amazing story, powerful, and I'm feeling it and I'm not sure where to begin. And so I'm just going to take a stab in this direction. So it's, it's more, I'm feeling like there's too much to say and less like. Wow. I'm just so blown away that I'm [00:12:00] at a loss for words.

[00:12:00] Yeah. Because they're very intimate. I mean, arguments that you hold on to, those are intimate conversations that are intimate memories that people are sharing with you. So they are very vulnerable. They're very vulnerable. Guests are very generous with their time. And we've had many guests and this was in no, in no way am I qualified to do this as like an [00:12:20] armchair therapist.

[00:12:20] And that was not the point either. I kind of came at this as a debate sense. And I think I thought naively that this show. Would really be about the kind of communicative argument, evidence exchange, right? Like you and I are in an argument over whether Tom Brady is the best quarterback of all time. And then you have [00:12:40] your arguments, right?

[00:12:41] About Superbowl is one and yard passes completed. And then I have my arguments about whoever my rival quarterback is like, Oh, no, it's this. The following quarterbacks are better than Brady because, and then we exchange evidence, right? And then what, maybe we just agree to disagree, but curious about that process, almost [00:13:00] none of these stories are like that.

[00:13:02] Almost none. And so the way that I was conceptualizing it somewhat naively was that it would almost be like I was in debate. And so I think I was coming at it from a debate point of view, not an argument point of view. And I was also coming at it from like a courtroom. point of view, like a prosecution and a defense that has a set of evidence and a set of [00:13:20] interpretations around common evidence, etc.

[00:13:22] And some of these have been dense exchanges of reasons and ideas. But for the most part, it's interpersonal discord or professional disagreements that are really about personality and about difficulty sharing the same space or finite resources or feeling jilted or excluded or cut out. [00:13:40] And those are really tough conflicts.

[00:13:41] And so the show has become a far more emotional vehicle. And now I really lean into that and talk about, you know, people's, how they felt and their, what their bodies are doing, what their brains are doing during that process. Because like you say, I would think if it's a, if it's a argument that they've held onto, that they remember.

[00:13:59] It is going to [00:14:00] be emotion based. It's not just a logical, you know, then one that they would be able to move on from. They've held onto it for a reason because it affected them. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we've had, we had stories of, um, really massive family blowouts, um, arguments that ended families. So obviously they're [00:14:20] hot button issues are political arguments that ruin friendships.

[00:14:24] But then we also had to illustrate because the show is not all Kind of darkness. Um, we also had a lot of light issues like, um, issues that were, maybe they were dark, but they had a happy ending. And so kind of arguments for reclamation of [00:14:40] relationships and actually conflict being productive to clear the ground in a relationship that needs a ground clearing or a kind of confusing, lighthearted argument that got a little heated and out of control.

[00:14:51] And it turns out that argument. Right. Arguing about how you always park weird in the driveway. Turns out that's actually about a bigger issue. And I just couldn't actually get to that [00:15:00] deeper issue unless I made my snide comment about you parking weird in the driveway. And that was really helpful for us to clear that air or productive for us for me to be able to see your side through the antagonism of a conflict.

[00:15:11] So not all bad, not all good. Not all clear cut. Some people arguing about stuff they don't even really feel that strongly about, but in the fog of an argument, you [00:15:20] find yourself in this pitched warfare and think, well, I've got to defend my side now because I've come this far, right? Right. Yeah. And that, um, so that's just part of what you do at the college.

[00:15:31] You're also a full, you know, you, you have a full slate of classes that you teach. You also are director of the [00:15:40] Which was launched about this time last year, I think. Eleven months ago. Yeah. Around Halloween, yeah. Um, and, and, previously you said, kind of when we kicked off the civility initiative, you said as director that colleges and universities should have a role in helping citizens get along with one another.

[00:15:59] And [00:16:00] showing the new data and social science on what effective communication practices look like. Um, you said we want to address the crisis of loneliness and community on one hand and anger and polarization on the other hand. So looking back at the past year, [00:16:20] do you feel like, do you feel like progress was made towards that goal with the initiative?

[00:16:26] And I know you have a whole nother we'll talk about the upcoming civility initiative events that you have to look forward to. So we have a whole year two of that. But, but looking back, do you do you feel like that's, was it? [00:16:40] Did it turn out as you expected? Or was it different? I mean, we had a pretty decent vision of This organization addressing fight issues and flight issues like I talked about.

[00:16:50] And so we had a slate of, you know, over a dozen events, panels, debates, movie screenings, you name it, guest speakers and [00:17:00] the like, workshops and trainings. All around the fight issues and flight issues. So how to have difficult conversations, how to be a more empathetic listener, panels on polarization and new research about how divided we really are looking at history and radical social movements and civility to what extent civility is [00:17:20] useful or not useful as a protest strategy.

[00:17:23] Um, a gathering of therapists and psychologists to talk about what healthy conflict and personal and romantic relationships looks like. So issues, big issues, small. The goal is always to reach a campus audience, a community, local audience, and then a national audience. And we're trying to do each of [00:17:40] those kind of at the same time, the podcast.

[00:17:43] And some trainings I do nationally are part of our national outreach efforts. And then we also like to host events on campus that folks are interested in and unite. Um, groups of folks who might not share the same space together automatically. And so we can be points of commonality or provide them [00:18:00] and, and not just one off events, but also kind of curricular integration.

[00:18:04] So ways that we can do this at scale and have regular recurring touch points with folks. Not just one speech in one class that, um, is gone before, you know, and there's only a record of it. And then in the community too, you're working with local libraries, high schools, et [00:18:20] cetera, to integrate into the wider Charleston community.

[00:18:22] So by those measures, you know, we've engaged thousands of students and citizens nationally. In the Charleston community and certainly on campus primarily. And so I just couldn't be happier with the way that it's gone, honestly. And I've been surprised you asked [00:18:40] about whether I was surprised. Certainly I was surprised at the enthusiasm that folks have had about it.

[00:18:46] I've been excited by the. Directions I didn't anticipate and that builds real excitement about what we could grow with this in the future. And tell us about some, you had an event earlier this week about, um, banned [00:19:00] books. Tell us about some of the upcoming events that, um, people can look forward to hopefully attending or, Yeah, for sure.

[00:19:09] Uh, we have several, um, and the, the, I'll just focus on events because I'm doing lots of trainings and speeches around the community and on campus as well. [00:19:20] Um, events we're hosting are next week, next Thursday, October 3rd. A documentary that's making the rounds in the documentary circuit, both nationally and internationally called undivide us about free speech and a polarized climate, we're having that documentarian come out, come down and do and screen the [00:19:40] documentary and then do a Q and a.

[00:19:42] With students and interested members of the public, then about 10 days. Yeah, I was really excited about undivided us. That's a big national documentary that we're, we're lucky to have him. And we'll make sure we put all information about events and everything in the show notes. Oh yeah. Thank you for that.

[00:19:56] Um, and then about 10 days later [00:20:00] and collaboration and that that's in a partnership with the center for market choice. Um, and that's been a really fun part of this is actually collaborating with, with like minded organizations, uh, both on and off campus. And then in collaboration, um, with the center for market choice, we're bringing him in next week, and then in [00:20:20] collaboration with the business school and the student success center, we're bringing in a speaker who's a pretty renowned researcher at Boston college named Michael Serrazio, who's written a few books about style, authenticity, and the idea of being yourself in a social media world.

[00:20:36] Right. And as it applies [00:20:40] to ourselves as individuals and individual quote brands, like, are you being yourself when you're online and representing yourself? And then as it applies to our culture, of course, our, and then our consumer culture, right? Are the products you're consuming, I buy a Prius or. Right. I shop at Walmart or whatever.

[00:20:56] What does that say about me and my authenticity, right? And my [00:21:00] consumer choices. And then in our media culture, what media we consume, what programs we watch, right? And to what extent that says something about my identity and the essence of who I am. And so he's written this fascinating new book and he's going to come talk about it with us.

[00:21:14] We have a huge event with, uh, Jamel Bowie from the New York times. We'll be on stage at the Satellite [00:21:20] Theater to help us make sense of whatever happens in the upcoming election. That's on November the 11th. I'm very excited about that. And then, um, in collaboration with the library society folks in that, that event is partnered with the communication studies department here at the college of Charleston.

[00:21:35] And then next semester, we've already got a big one lined up with the library society folks [00:21:40] with Alexander Hefner. Who's the host. Of a show on PBS of another show on Bloomberg about breaking bread with people, essentially dining as a way to bridge, uh, differences amongst folks. Oh, interesting. Yeah. And so he's coming to talk about his work in depolarizing spaces.

[00:21:58] Alexander Heffernan, that'll be in [00:22:00] February. Okay. We'll make sure we get all of that up there. Those all sound fascinating. Um, yeah, it's amazing to me what, what you all have been able to pull off with the civility initiative and getting, getting these. I think people here to talk about their expertise. We only do it through, you know, through the efforts of a lot of folks who are working on this and a lot of group efforts and then, [00:22:20] you know, through the college's, um, commitment to this and then through, um, philanthropy, you know, through private donations as well.

[00:22:26] Yeah. Yeah. Um. You did mention the election and, and the event that you'll have post election. So that will be an interesting, um, event. Um, so, [00:22:40] uh, we only at this time, I think the election is what, five, six weeks from now. Can you talk about, just maybe offer a couple tips for people for the next couple weeks on how to kind of navigate difficult times?

[00:22:54] Potentially difficult conversations with people of opposing views, friends and family and colleagues, [00:23:00] you know, just day to day when you're having a chat with somebody getting coffee or something like, yeah. Yeah. I'd happy to. I mean, it's obviously tough and, and, and take deep breaths and stay calm in your body.

[00:23:12] Yeah. Yeah. Stay embodied. Stay mindful about what's going on internally for you. Um, I really try to embrace [00:23:20] curiosity. When it comes to folks, there's this idea that comes from a scholar named Liliana Mason, who talks about the concept of mega identities. Essentially, the argument is Americans used to tolerate more.

[00:23:34] kind of cross cutting contradictions within ourselves. And so it used to not be all that strange [00:23:40] to own a gun, go to church, drive a pickup and be a Democrat. And, uh, not so much the case anymore at a population level, you know, speaking with a painting with a big brush. And so then with that in mind, it, in each of us retreating into our echo chambers and trying to make sure that our lives stay internally [00:24:00] consistent so that we feel to go to the previous point.

[00:24:03] authentic, right? And we're not producing a lot of cognitive dissonance that can lead to a kind of conflict avoidance. I don't even want to hear somebody who might think differently, or I don't even want to hear if I'm a huge supporter of Harris that I don't want to hear somebody who's even more tepid in their support for Harris, right?

[00:24:19] We [00:24:20] need to have total alignment or this conflict feels uncomfortable, much less somebody who supports the other side. And so I try to approach those differences with one, to humanize them, that we've each derived that our various points of view, not just because we have, as computers do, you know, assessed all the data and spit out the [00:24:40] answer to the, um, to the equation, but also that we've done so for biographical reasons, right?

[00:24:46] These, these feelings we have, these beliefs we have, they do. biographical work for us. They do psychological work for us. They do fantasy work for us. And we feel them very strongly in our commitments are emotional to them. And so trying to be [00:25:00] curious about the human process that led to someone that led both of us to disagree with one another on this issue.

[00:25:07] And then And then third to first was sort of the mindfulness about the body stuff. And the second one is about humanizing disagreement and being curious about that. Curiosity is such a key word to keep in the [00:25:20] forefront of your mind when, yeah, I'm deeply curious about where somebody gets their information, why they feel committed to that cause and the biographical process that's led them to this point, right, who they are.

[00:25:31] Is a result of all their aggregate experiences. And, and they had probably have a fourth, you know, some of that self that inward looking [00:25:40] too, is I have no doubt that future generations are going to look at all of us. Not me, like any future generation is going to be paying attention to me, but if they were to look at my life under a microscope.

[00:25:51] I bet, I imagine that they would find some things that they found monstrous. Like, who is it, you know, so I can get up on my righteous high horse all I want to right [00:26:00] now. I have no doubt that I'm walking around and not knowing all of the things that I feel strongly about that I'm actually wrong about.

[00:26:06] And the things that I don't even know. Are are going to feel monstrous and out of the realm of human possibilities to future generations that they look back on all of us and think, how could they live like that? Right? How do they make peace with [00:26:20] themselves and just walk around like nothing was wrong when they were doing X, Y, and Z all the time.

[00:26:25] And so if I can just kind of come down from my pedestal a little bit, then that eases that process. And the process, it eases the process of doing number five, which is finding common ground about anything, not necessarily about the issue. Like you vote for Trump and I vote for, for [00:26:40] Harris. But finding it about pickleball or love of jazz or horror movies or pizza, right?

[00:26:49] And so if you want to sustain and grow and facilitate a relationship, finding those points of commonality and not just emphasizing those points of difference are really vital. Those [00:27:00] are great. Those are great. Very important tips. I think for all of us to keep in mind. Um, and, and lastly, we're getting close to the end of time here and, um, again, we're so appreciative for you to come into the studio today, especially today is like post hurricane Helene and it's still [00:27:20] super windy outside.

[00:27:21] Um, but just thinking, listening to you and knowing everything that you're involved with, you've spent the last year. Plus, entrenched in the world of disagreements with your podcast, with the civility initiative, and in the classroom, in your [00:27:40] role as a professor. Do you feel, um, disheartened or encouraged?

[00:27:46] Is it hard to spend so much time thinking about and talking about conflict? Like, do you go home at the end of the day and just, and just watch? Stupid, silly comedy movies with your kids, because it's [00:28:00] got a way on you. Uh, that's such a good question. I'd love to ask your kids that question. They probably just think I'm, I'm silly, but I, that I retreat into play and, and just like joking around.

[00:28:12] Which is great. And I think that's, that's probably what they would say if they were here at this point. They would be horrified to, you know, so embarrassed as [00:28:20] tweens to be like, what's your dad like? Right. Oh my God. I don't want to talk about him. I'm so deeply embarrassed of him all the time. Um, I, I, I, you know, grew up kind of terrified by conflict, fascinated by conflict.

[00:28:35] And then I joined the debate team, not because I couldn't see [00:28:40] why I was doing it, but I think I really found a home in high school college debate because I, I, it was a safe outlet for something that I thought was, I had a lot of fear around conflict. And so this was a kind of a sporting way to engage it, right?

[00:28:56] It became way safer in a controlled. a [00:29:00] controlled antagonism, right, right, where it couldn't really escalate. You were also, you know, very much dedicating your life to it, because it was a very immersive activity. And then I wrote two books about American political arguments. It took me the better part of two decades to write those two, a bit of a slow writer.

[00:29:18] And so looking [00:29:20] back on it, this year is unique in the sense that I'm now engaged in this podcast, which I adore and event planning, which I adore and directing the civility initiative, which I adore. And those are very different pursuits, but there is the kind of through line for my whole adult life is engaging with being fascinated by and somewhat terrified by.

[00:29:37] So it doesn't feel that different, to be honest. [00:29:40] Yeah, that's really interesting that it's something that you're terrified by or were. And that's what, what you still walked towards. I would call it like a profound ambivalence. You know, you feel both things very strongly. Um, almost like fire, right? Mm-Hmm.

[00:29:58] You're sitting, sitting around a [00:30:00] fire, you feel cold and right. You're, you go towards it. It's also kind of enchanting and mesmerizing just to sit there and look at it. Mm-Hmm. . And you realize you're getting a little close to it. Mm-Hmm. . And it's starting to send your clothes and you take a step back. Yeah.

[00:30:10] And you're like, I'm cold again. And Yeah. And that thing's really interesting. And let's put some more logs on there. You go back towards it. Yeah. Um, and I also, ideologically, am deeply committed to the process of [00:30:20] exchanging ideas as a, as the best way to figure out how you're wrong, how we're wrong, what the, what the truth is of a, of a situation, as well as a kind of social instrument to help with cooperation, collaboration, cooperation, um, and everybody feeling like their voice is getting heard.

[00:30:37] Right. And, but just like fire, it [00:30:40] can, you know, heat up your house or burn it down. Mm hmm. Mm hmm. That's a great line to end on. Heat up your house or burn it down. That's a great final last line. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks for having me. Thanks for coming in. This was a great conversation and I encourage everybody to look at our show notes and to find out information about all the events and come to the [00:31:00] events, um, and, and see them and witness them in person and, and, um, take note of how, how your body is feeling while you're listening to these conversations.

[00:31:09] And, um, and, and thanks again so much and, um, take care.[00:31:20] 

[00:31:20] Thank you for listening to this episode of Speaking of College of Charleston with today's guest Michael Lee. If you liked this episode, please help us reach more listeners by sharing it with a friend or leaving a review. For show notes and more episodes, visit the College of Charleston's official news site, The [00:31:40] College Today at today.

[00:31:41] charleston. edu. Dot charleston.edu. You can find episodes on all major podcast platforms. This episode was produced by Amy Stockwell with recording and sound engineering by Jesse Ks from the Division of Information [00:32:00] Technology.