They Would Recognize The Music

 They Would Recognize the Music

Beyond Inclusion: Ownership and Belonging on the Journey to Pluralism

MG Kaplan

January 23, 2023

 When we talk about diversity and inclusion, as we have for a couple of hundred years in the U.S., in some form or another, the focus is usually on the groups that have been excluded, whether that exclusion has been in legal ways, overt bigotry, or more subtle behaviors.  This focus makes sense, of course, because these are the groups that have been, or are, suffering from a lack of full inclusion, and they are often viscerally aware of their exclusion.  When the focus is on the traditionally included groups, as it sometimes is, it is usually on their advantages or privileges.  This also makes sense, because when we have advantages, we tend not to see them, and thus there is little awareness or energy to drive change, so the goal to increase awareness of privileges is important.  This basic dynamic has been playing out likely for centuries,  and certainly in the U.S., as each issue of difference emerges into our public discourse.  Essentially, it is the push for change from excluded groups against the resistance to change from included groups.  Though these dynamics are predictable and understandable, they are becoming less sustainable in our polarized society, particularly as we become even more diverse, and power becomes more distributed across more diverse groups.  We need a new way to think about ourselves as a diverse society.

The truth is, we are becoming more and more diverse.  Our racial demographics are remarkable, as we near a point in about 20 years where only 50% of the U.S. population will be white.  Although it doesn’t always seem like it, we are also becoming more inclusive, with social attitude surveys showing a significant improvement in tolerance and acceptance of all kinds of difference.  Diversity and inclusion are not guaranteed by each other, but they sometimes work together.  For example, gay, lesbian and bisexual people, though always present and likely in similar numbers across time, are more visibly and practically present in our culture (and thus we are more diverse in this tangible sense), and this is because our culture has become more inclusive.  We are more diverse by age, family/parental status, national origin, culture, first language, and many other categories.  This diversity comes from both inevitable demographic changes but also from a more open, inclusive culture.  We are making progress, but as is our history, that progress is paralleled by a reactionary element, and given the amount of change, the reactionary counterforce is quite powerful right now.  Moreover, all of this is exacerbated by an increasing globalization of communication via the internet and social media.  We are in a period of time when change is deep, fast, and multi-faceted, and the dynamics of human diversity are right in the middle of it.

Thus, we need a new and more resonant path, one that doesn’t replicate the past but instead brings us towards a more manageable place in the future.  Our patten of primarily focusing on the inclusion of excluded groups is not enough.  We should not be directing our efforts primarily toward correcting past wrongs, though we can’t ignore them and pretend that past wrongs have no impact today.  Rather, we must create a new vision for inclusion that speaks to more people.  We can see today what happens when we splinter, when we argue over who is the most victimized, when we polarize into various identities.  This does not mean we shouldn’t focus on reducing bias and discrimination; in fact, we will probably always have to take individual and societal action to create more equity, fairness and justice.  Despite progress, there is too still too much bigotry, bias and unfairness, and we should keep working to reduce it.  However, in a larger sense, we need a societal effort that is embraced by more people, a socio-cultural push for pluralism, where there is room for multiple life experiences and perspectives¾even if these are not shared by all or even by a majority¾and where we all can see the benefit to ourselves of our diverse society.  We need to foster not just inclusion but a sense of belonging that emerges from pluralism, and is broadly felt.  Unfortunately, in today’s world, we fight for our viewpoint to win, defining belonging in an insular, zero-sum sort of way.

Virtue signaling has become the norm today across the political spectrum.  We search for and amplify every utterance that might be seen as biased to prove how wise, in touch, and “woke” we are.  Being “woke”, which at its essence is about being aware and not in denial of bias and bigotry, is a good thing, but not so productive when attached to notions of being morally superior.  I would rather that more of us who define ourselves as woke would look at ourselves more closely, and spend time trying to connect with those less aware, rather than judging them as morally inferior.  We also try to prove our belonging to our “tribe” by spouting lies and ungrounded conspiracy theories in a way that is cult-like, irrational, and destructive, with the focus on “owning” the other side.  I would rather that those who want to “own the libs” would instead take ownership for creating a diverse, inclusive society that works.  This bi-partisan virtue signaling achieves nothing, and only demonstrates our collective insecurity in who we are.  In a quest to feel like we belong, we achieve just the opposite, as we feed divisiveness.  We will never create a diverse, inclusive, and pluralistic society¾ one in which a strong majority feels a sense of belonging¾if we aren’t able to foster a broader sense of ownership in the whole endeavor.  Fortunately, we have a history and framework via our laws and Constitution, and very compelling historical rhetoric of values that does speak to our need to get it right.

My professional work involves helping organizations leverage their diversity, become more inclusive, and foster a sense of belonging.  A few decades ago, the focus was on just getting more diversity, but now there is a lot of diversity, so that focus is on how to make it work.  Healthy organizations know this work is essential to their success.  There is an analogy, various forms of which have been described to me by others, that goes something like this:  “Diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance.”  This is a useful analogy because we often think that the presence of diversity automatically creates inclusion; it doesn’t.  However, inclusion by itself isn’t enough.  “Belonging” is the new framework many organizations are starting to embrace.  In a recent conversation, I suggested adding an extension to the diversity and inclusion metaphor, as follows: “Diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance; belonging is recognizing the music when you show up to the party.”  We don’t all have to like all of the music all of the time, but we should recognize it as collectively ours.  It is not enough to be invited to someone else’s party and asked to dance.  We need to all feel like it is our party, and that we fully belong, that even if we don’t love the music, we see ourselves somewhere in the lyrics or the tune.   Incidentally, American music is a good example of this kind of belonging.  In the December issue of the magazine, Hemispheres, author Justin Goldman writes about his trip to Appalachia and the mid-south.  He describes a musical tradition inclusive of many different kinds of people and traditions who connect to each other through their music, and collaborate to create something that is unique and in which they can see themselves.  American music is perhaps the most powerful analogy for leveraging our diversity to create something better, richer, and fuller, that we can all relate to and have a sense of ownership for.  We need a stronger sense of ownership for our unique social experiment of intentionally bringing together a diverse and ever-changing population.  We need to recognize our national metaphorical music - the lyrics, tunes and harmonies of our ever-changing culture.  This is a path of ownership and belonging that can emerge in a truly pluralistic society 

The non-pluralistic alternative is what we see now:  a fight for who is right and who can dominate, a battle to be the “one-up” and not the “one-down.”   There will always be power dynamics in any society, most certainly in a diverse society, but these dynamics need to ebb and flow and not be the primary social dynamic as they seem to be now.  As change accelerates, we need more shared ownership for a pluralistic outcome.  This has to be done in our collective spaces, in the civic institutions that bring us together around our shared interests.  Three areas of activity could promote this sense of shared ownership:  1) a re-articulation of our national proposition and our shared interest and values in continually creating a diverse country that works; 2) public policy that puts the collective interest over the interests of specific groups, not in ways that ignore group-based discrimination, but in ways that speak to and positively impact more of us; and 3) participation in civic institutions that focus on our collectiveness.  Every day, all over the country, there are opportunities to come together and pursue shared interests.  This happens in workplaces, in local governments and committees, in school boards and in a variety of other institutions.  If this feels boring and bureaucratic, just think about music, about social clubs, sports groups, etc.  I’m on my town’s conservation commission.  When we meet as diverse groups around shared interests, the result is better ideas and shared ownership.  When we own something, we usually work hard to make it succeed.

In 2026, we will celebrate 250 years since our independence, a time when we articulated a powerful set of values that we then set into action.  Due to various social and demographic forces, we are now possibly on the verge of realizing those values and aspirations.  Let us not stay stuck in our tribes, especially now.  Do you have a sense of ownership of our collective social experiment called the United States of America?  Why or why not?  What are the values expressed in our national framework that you can connect with?  How can you express that connection in your interactions with other people?  While I am optimistic about where we are headed, it will not happen without action and participation by many.  How can you help?