Jason Scott Montoya

"In October 1962, the fate of the world hung on the U.S. response to the discovery of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba.

President Kennedy’s decision to impose a blockade was based on hours of discussions with top advisers (the so-called ExComm), yet decades of scholarship on the crisis have missed the central puzzle: How did the group select one response, the blockade, when all options seemed bad?

Recently released audio recordings are used to argue that the key conversational activity was storytelling about an uncertain future. Kennedy’s choice of a blockade hinged on the narrative “suppression” of its most dangerous possible consequence, namely the perils of a later attack against operational missiles, something accomplished through omission, self-censorship, ambiguation, uptake failure, and narrative interdiction."

“The most straightforward intervention is to simply give people accurate information about other people's political attitudes.”

The full paper also mentions some other options.

Focus discussions on consequences instead of values.

Foster deeper discussions on the topics so people can see the inherent complexities and avoid oversimplification.

And, reframe the issues around sadness instead of anger to foster more willingness to compromise.

"…during that night in Gethsemane, the thought and feeling of the GodMan embraced fallen humanity numbering many, many millions, and He wept with loving sorrow over each individual separately, as only the omniscient heart of God could." - Metropolitan Anthony, The Dogma of Redemption