therefore rarely admitted, this significantly changes the
tone of the conversation. Thanks to these conversations,
participants enrich their Weltanschauung. They are able to
share not only their opinions but the life experiences that
led them to perceive the world in a certain way and draw
certain conclusions.
A student from Texas, for instance, now understands how
Americans are perceived by Egyptians; a Moroccan student can explain to her Dutch counterpart her reasons for
wearing the headscarf. A Jewish New Yorker can tell what
he felt during 9/11/01 and his Palestinian counterpart what
he went through during the Gaza bombing of 2008. Some
participants experience a deep transformation in the way
they view the “other.” Many change their minds about
some deeply held beliefs. Some of those conversations
allow a number of Muslims who are living in the West and
sometimes idealizing the East to have a better grasp of the
reality of citizens in the region. An Arab American suffering
from discrimination in the U.S. discovered that her Moroccan counterpart was forced by her family to wear a hijab,
and was desperate to have the freedom to remove it. One
Tunisian student entered the program with a clear narrative in his head: that Americans did not understand Islam
and could only see Muslims as potential threats. However
the Americans in the group, along with some of the Middle
Eastern and North Africans students, gently challenged this
view through various discussions. The Tunisian student
ended up acknowledging that he respected Americans
even though he disliked American policy.
On the “other side,” a US soldier realizes that perhaps
all US military interventions have not been as positive
for people on the ground as he had thought. Through
EV, Westerners have been exposed first hand information on the causes and implications of the Arab uprisings
from the testimonies of Tunisian, Egyptian, Syrian and Gulf
participants on the ground. Many have been taken aback
when being able to see "refugees" as real persons and not
some abstract concept. French students have made significant shifts in their feelings about veiled Muslim women
because of the stories and testimonies of women in the
Muslim world. One student, prior to one dialogue session,
thought that covered women were not “free,” and ended
up reconsidering that thought after hearing her Tunisian
counterpart tell how she made the decision to cover their
hair, even against her family’s wishes. Facilitators create a
safe space to enable participants to go beyond the surface
of stated positions — “Hijab is backwards” vs “Hijab is liberating” for instance.
Intercultural dialogue doesn’t just affect intercultural
relations. It also provides a real opportunity for intra-iden-
tity relations to evolve. In fact, the Western and Eastern
societies each present a considerable intra social and cul-
tural differences, sometimes even more so than compared
with the “outgroup.” At a moment when both Eastern and
Western societies are undergoing deep change and stress,
addressing internal divisions on both sides becomes more
and more essential, not only for solving local issues but
also to enable a more authentic and valuable cross regional
dialogue. Within these online encounters, gender rela-
tions in the predominantly Muslim world have sometimes
evolved towards more balance between men and women.
And Westerners also have often been able to address
political differences between liberals and conservatives in a
more civil manner.
LEARNING ON OUR BEHAVIORS
However, the exchange focuses not just on talking about
facts and opinions but on the way we talk about them.
Online dialogue can shift public discourse in terms of content as well as process. To think critically about our differing
views helps participants enhance the quality of their conversation by adding a meta-layer onto it. Meta-thinking
doesn’t just happen during the online sessions but also
in class, and talking about the way they deal with differences helps participants shift their communication from a
confrontational to a collaborative mode. It allows each to
understand why they think the way they think, and why
others may think differently. Emotions take an integral
part of the learning in that regard because they provide an
entry point to information that was buried in our subconscious. Participants of different identity groups openly and
honestly speak about what makes them uncomfortable,
fearful, confused, or even angry, and what is really at stake
for them. Dialogue is centered on individual realities rather
than abstract truth. One of them declared: “Thanks to my
experience, I had a better way to share my perspectives
on what is like to live in the Middle East. Rather than sharing facts, I shared with them my personal experiences so
they can be able to understand my story and relate to it.” It
is now widely accepted by conflict resolution practitioners
that sharing experiences is much more effective in shifting
the quality of public discourse, than merely sharing facts.
At a moment when both Eastern and Western
societies are undergoing deep change and stress,
addressing internal divisions on both sides
becomes more and more essential, not only for
solving local issues but also to enable a more
authentic and valuable cross regional dialogue.
MODELS
