“More and more I come to loathe any dominion of one over another; any imposition of the will.” Virginia Woolf
“For Jesus, there are no countries to be conquered, no ideologies to be imposed, no people to be dominated. There are only children, women and men to be loved.” Henri Nouwen
“Children are a wonderful gift. They have an extraordinary capacity to see into the heart of things and to expose sham and humbug for what they are.” Desmond Tutu
I’ve been thinking about windows and mirrors lately. When we impose our thoughts or ideologies on people, we are essentially building a world of mirrors – trying to create an environment in which everything is a reflection of ourselves. When we expose ourselves and others to new ideas, new options, new ways of seeing and experiencing life, we are building a world of windows – opening our lens to look willingly at information that deepens our understanding of differences.
To impose your view, value, or belief on another person means to expect them to do something that they do not want to do or that is inconvenient. To expose means to make something visible by uncovering it and/or by revealing the true nature of someone or something – even to lay bare what may objectionable. As hard as it may be at times, it seems to me that exposition may be the best antidote to imposition. For example, to write something that describes details and provides facts and evidence that support a particular topic in spite of the reaction it may elicit.
The idea of “windows and mirrors” was first introduced by Emily Style, an educator, in 1968. Windows allow readers to see into different lives and different ideas. Mirrors reflect a person’s own culture, ethnicity, and philosophy. Sydney Harris, an American journalist and author, said that “most people reflect the emotions of the time, while few open windows that bring light to dark places.” My older daughter and her colleague apply those ideas at their company The Artful Belonging Studio. If you are interested in opening more windows in your life or in your organizations, I shamelessly recommend that you take a look.
Exposing inconvenient truths by opening windows has its risks. Thomas Watson, an innovator best known for building IBM since its founding in 1914, challenges us to take that risk. I quote, “Expose your ideas to the danger of controversy. Speak your mind and fear less the label of “crackpot” than the stigma of conformity.”
Reading books is one way open us to worlds that we may never have imagined. Zadie Smith said, “I like the books that expose me to people unlike me and books that do battle against caricature or simplification. That, to me, is the heroic in fiction.” To me, books are windows that can expose us to new people and possibilities. For example, I’m reading Reagan right now by Max Boot, and I’m getting entirely new perspectives on who he was – a slick, superficial, simplistic, and solipsistic politician who began the dismantling of the government, the gaslighting of truth, and the shifting of wealth from the lower 90% to the top 1% in the 80’s. Exposure doesn’t always lead to comfortable places.
Imposition seeks to enforce a particular ideology or worldview through coercion and control, while exposure aims to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of different perspectives, allowing individuals to make informed choices. Examining the contrasting effects of these approaches, particularly in the realms of personal will, language, and values, reveals that exposing the truth yields far greater and more sustainable results than imposing a specific worldview. The battle we are witnessing today is a tug of war between the imposers and the imposters on one side and the exposers and expositors on the other side. Sadly, It feels like the imposers and imposters are currently winning.
I asked Google Gemini to cite references in the literature that discuss the differential effects of exposing vs. imposing. Here are some of the examples that Gemini produced in two seconds:
- Shakespeare’s “The Tempest” provides a compelling example of how imposition breeds resistance. Prospero’s tyrannical control over Caliban leads to the latter’s deep-seated resentment and eventual rebellion.
- George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” which I referenced in my last post, shows how the “Party” seeks to control every aspect of citizens’ lives, and ultimately results in widespread fear and the erosion of individual identity.
- Dee Brown, in “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee,” reveals how the forced assimilation of Native American children into boarding schools in the United States resulted in the loss of indigenous languages and cultural practices. This form of linguistic imperialism not only disrupts cultural transmission but also inflicts deep psychological wounds, leading to feelings of alienation and cultural identity crises.
- In Plato’s “Republic,” Socrates advocates for the importance of dialogue and the examination of different viewpoints in the pursuit of truth.
- John Stuart Mill, in his essay “On Liberty,” argues that the free exchange of ideas is essential for individual and societal progress. By encountering opposing arguments and evaluating their merits, individuals develop a more nuanced understanding of the world and are better equipped to make informed decisions.
These examples help to explain why reducing exposure to inconvenient truths is often vigorously promoted by authoritarian regimes. They highlight the psychological consequences of forced compliance, where individuals, stripped of their autonomy, become disengaged and even subversive.
In a recent article in the New York Times, Daron Acemoglu, a professor at MIT and Nobel Prize winner, discusses how the liberal world needs to change if we are going to meet the challenges of the populist wave. Acemoglu begins by exposing the weaknesses of the liberal establishment: too much focus on individualism and too little focus on the common good; too much imposition of values by the educated elite and too little class diversity in the base; too much emphasis on procedures and processes and too little emphasis on achieving outcomes through streamlining; too much thought policing and too little welcoming of different points of view; too much catering to the liberal far left and too little connecting with the center; too much wallowing in our woes and too little welcoming of perceived foes; too much imposing our views and too little exposing of our own weaknesses. I would encourage you to read the article.
The first thing I read every morning is the daily Letter from an American by Heather Cox Richardson. I love her ability to link current events to historical context. In a recent letter she discussed how Lincoln struggled to get his messages across and to broaden his base of support. I quote, “The trouble Lincoln perceived stemmed from the growing lawlessness in the country as men ignored the rule of law and acted on their passions, imposing their will on the neighbors through violence”. Now we have a President who is more interested in imposing his will than following the law. To compound the problem, he wants to eliminate any risk of being exposed to different points of view, e.g. by firing Inspector Generals.
There is precedence, of course, of people acting on their passions from both ends of the political spectrum. Abbie Hoffman, an American political and social activist who found the Youth International Parties (the Yippies), was a member of the Chicago Seven, and was a leading proponent of the Flower Power movement. He was charged with conspiring to use interstate commerce with intent to incite a riot as a result of rallying protesters during the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. To his credit, as he reflected on his experience, he concluded: “Never impose your language on people you wish to reach.” Evidently, he opened a window to his soul and found a new truth.
Frederick Douglass also knew intimately the effects of imposition. He dedicated his whole life to opposing the imposition of slavery. One conclusion he made from all of his work was: “Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them.” Douglass, of course, was the most important leader of the African American civil rights movement in the 19th century. After escaping from slavery, he became a national leader of the abolitionist movement and gained fame for his speaking and writing. He provided a window to supporters of slavery that persons of color did not lack intellectual capacity. Sadly, too many whites refused to expose themselves to that truth, choosing instead to continue impose their will on others. Over 100 years later, some are still hanging onto those dehumanizing beliefs.
Fast forward to the present, it appears that the Trump administration is far more interested in installing mirrors and closing as many windows and doors as possible. Shuttering all DEI initiatives, shutting down the borders, putting up blinders on the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Accords, threatening to pull out of NATO, hiring sycophants, etc. etc. It seems to me the strategy is two-fold: 1) Spray and Pray, i.e. throw out as many orders as possible to see what sticks and to make it almost impossible for people to look deeply into any of them, and 2) Distract and Deny, e.g. create as much hype as possible on issues like DEI and Trans rights, Tik Tok, migrant crime, the price of eggs and then denying any responsibility for anything that is not working. Oy!
in closing, let me return to the opening quotes. Virginia Woolf, a British author and essayist best known for her 1925 novel Mrs. Dalloway, loathed any dominion of one over another, any imposition of the will. I wish more of us would share that belief. Henri Nouwen, a Catholic Priest, writer, and theologian whose beliefs were rooted in social justice, reminded us that there are no countries that need to be conquered, no ideologies that need to be imposed, and no people that need to be dominated. “There are only children, women and men to be loved.” Christian Nationalist evangelicals might want to expose themselves to that idea instead of trying to impose their religious beliefs on the “seven mountains.” And Desmond Tutu, a South African Bishop known for his work as an anti-apartheid activist, implores us to appreciate the wonderful gift of children to see into the heart of things and to expose sham when they see it. As my beloved grandson would say, when he hears of sees something that lacks credibility, “Sus!”
The leaders and parents I have most admired in my career have been those who are more committed to exposing than imposing. Great leaders look for ways to expose their employees to developmental opportunities and new ways of doing things; they don’t impose ideologies as a condition of working. Great parents encourage their kids to pursue their passions and possibilities; they don’t impose their preferred options on their children as a condition of love. Indeed, great people don’t impose their values and beliefs on others; and they expose their weaknesses and vulnerabilities openly.
I’m hoping we will see less imposing and more exposing as we create a new reality in our world. I’m hoping we will see fewer conquered countries and a lessening of imposed ideologies. Finally, I’m hoping that we will cherish the wondrous gifts of our children to expose the inconvenient truths we ignore at our own peril. After all, the Doomsday Clock is now down to 89 seconds. That’s a truth we all need to be exposed to.
Emily Dickenson may have said it best:
“I dwell in Possibility –
A fairer House than Prose –
More numerous of Windows –
Superior – for Doors –“
May your windows and mirrors be clear and may doors always open.
Love it Ricky! Thank you