Step Ten: Being Open to Change with Dr. Steven Windisch

This episode is step ten in the 10-Step Toolkit to Having Critical Conversations featuring Steven Windisch, the Director of the Crime and Security Data Analytics Lab in the Terrorism Research Center at the University of Arkansas. Dr. Windisch's research breaks away from approaches limited to specific phases of the extremist’s life course, such as their period of incarceration. Instead, his research emphasizes the accumulation of risk factors (e.g., physical abuse) and life events (e.g., divorce) that occur during childhood, adolescence, or adulthood and how these experiences increase one’s susceptibility to accepting extremist beliefs. 

 In this episode, we:

• discuss risk factors to lead to extremism
• examine the role of compassion and exposure in creating change
• the importance of support systems in drawing people out of extremism
• tangible tools to aid and be open to change
  
  

If you have any questions or comments you would like addressed in the  Q&A with Dr. Windisch, please email whatsjustpod@gmail.com And please follow Whatsjust on Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn and subscribe to the weekly newsletter to get details on where and when the Live Q&A is happening! 

And, as always, please review, subscribe, and share with everyone you know :)

Become a supporter of the show with a monthly subscription (amount of your choice) and get a shoutout in upcoming episodes!

Timestamps:

04:26 Defining Change in Extremist Beliefs

12:21 Risk Factors and Pathways to Extremism

19:59 The Role of Compassion and Empathy

26:01 Challenges in Addressing White Supremacy

33:30 Navigating the Stigma of White Supremacy Upon Deradicalization

35:13 The Power of Kindness in Initiating Change

36:53 Personal Experiences with Change

38:36 Parenthood and Identity Transformation

40:17 The Process of Change and Openness

42:43 Challenges in Critical Conversations

46:10 Finding Common Ground in Difficult Dialogues

50:38 Supporting Change and Overcoming Stigma

59:16 Three Captivating Things

Chapters

• 4:26 Defining Change in Extremist Beliefs
• 12:21 Risk Factors and Pathways to Extremism
• 19:59 The Role of Compassion and Empathy
• 26:01 Challenges in Addressing White Supremacy
• 33:30 Navigating the Stigma of White Supremacy Upon Deradicalization
• 35:13 The Power of Kindness in Initiating Change
• 36:53 Personal Experiences with Change
• 38:36 Parenthood and Identity Transformation
• 40:17 The Process of Change and Openness
• 42:43 Challenges in Critical Conversations
• 46:10 Finding Common Ground in Difficult Dialogues
• 50:38 Supporting Change and Overcoming Stigma
• 59:16 Three Captivating Things

Transcript

  We should be viewing the willingness to change as like a golden ticket. If somebody's willing to change, we need to maximize that opportunity because it could close. Then you have this issue where it's like, how do we get into that armor? How do we chink across that, that defense? But if they show that crack in the fissure, we got to be like water, seep in there, let it freeze and crack that thing open. 

Please listen carefully.  You have arrived at the final step of the 10 step toolkit to having a critical conversation. I cannot believe we're already here. I am so pleased with how this toolkit came together. I thought each episode mapped perfectly onto the next, and I loved how each interviewed expert referenced at least one of the other episode's themes.

And you have learned so much. so much and have gifted yourself 10 hours of learning through this season so I hope you feel expanded and positively impacted by the information you've received over these 10 episodes and just thank you so much for hanging in. I'm sure some of the reflections the episodes may have prompted were difficult or that some of the conversations it may have inspired were intimidating but I hope you felt supported by the knowledge you've gained and by the content.

community. You're absolutely a part of through this podcast. I would love to hear about your experiences. So there's a link to text me in the show notes, hit me up, let me know what's on your mind. And also if you felt inspired by this podcast, I would deeply, deeply appreciate you leaving a review. Reviews are one of the main ways people are drawn to the podcast and how podcasts get on featured lists.

So it would just be so amazing if you personally could help in enhancing the podcast's exposure.  Okay, so, so far we've worked to become self aware, address our biases, become curious, create safety and conflict, ask questions, listen, become vulnerable, drop defenses, become empathetic, and now we finally learn how to become open to change. 

Today's episode features Dr. Steven Wittich, the director of the Crime and Security Data Analytics Lab in the Terrorism Research Center at the University of Arkansas. Dr. Wittich's research examines how the accumulation of risk factors, like physical abuse, and life events, like divorce, that occur over the life of a person.

course, increase one's susceptibility to accepting extremist beliefs. Our interview focuses on processes of change, acknowledging that even those who hold the most extreme views can be changed through simple acts of kindness and compassion. cumulative over time. I strongly encourage you to listen to this episode with an open mind.

If you're feeling triggered or surprised by any of the content, I encourage you to re listen and reflect on why some of these concepts may be stirring emotions in you, and what are the assumptions and stories the concepts might be challenging. All right, let's get into it. My name is Steven 

Windisch. I'm an assistant professor at Temple University. My research focuses on white supremacy and domestic terrorism.  Uh, my research kind of departs from  previous attempts, or I guess approaches,  that look at phases of an extremist life, maybe like their incarceration, or it looks at mental illness, and some of the things they've had to deal with,  uh, with those phases of their life.

Uh, I try to take more of a life course approach.  where I piece together their pre entry experiences, things that happened in their childhood, connect those to risk factors for why they got into white supremacy, and then see, again, the connection between those risk factors and their  participation improvement. 

And then the end of that kind of research comes, comes full circle, similar to other research. Criminal careers extremism typically comes to an end at some point, and these people integrate back into society. And so looking at that change process has also been, I think, really pivotal and understanding that this is a life course issue that really  is connected to everything that comes before and after. 

So I'm wondering, because so much of your research is centered on this concept of change, can you, for our listeners, just define for like how you and your research define change?  Absolutely. Yeah, I love your podcast because you look at big issues, but you provide nuance and subtlety. Okay. And so I want to take that similar approach.

We could look at change as somebody becoming. An extremist and then a non extremist and  that's it happens, obviously, but I think that that process has more layers to it. And so are we talking about  change in belief? Which we refer to as de radicalization or radicalization, uh, and essentially the best way to think about that is like, from the mainstream to the margins.

And so, somebody's radicalizing, they're going from mainstream thought to more extremist, marginalized thought. And so, the change could be just that. Maybe somebody stays in the movement, or it stays, still adheres to these ideologies, but they change their behavior. And, and so they're just, you know, Not participating in the movement anymore, and they're not going to shows, and they're not protesting, and they're not posting on social media, but they still have their belief system.

The same could set the other direction. Somebody can completely renounce the belief system and be like, I don't believe in this anymore, but I'm still going to all the activities. I'm still kind of going through the motions. So we have to look at it that way, right? So is there a change of belief, a change of behavior, both?

Are we talking about change at the individual level too, which is where my research tends to focus on. I'm looking at that. Is there any, any change in belief or behavior at the individual level? Some of these These changes have stigmas with them and criminal justice system in particular, somebody can change their belief system from the margins to the mainstream, but they still have the stigma of being a convict.

So it's further complicated that an individual internally can say, I don't believe that I've changed. I don't identify with that, but society still brands them as that.  When we look at change, we have to look at it from all these different dimensions from belief to behavior. To individual society, those that have stigma, those that don't have stigma, and I guess any kind of change that I'm interested in is from the margins to the mainstream that that if I could quantify change or if I can operationalize it, it would be anything that says, Okay, I'm going to  lessen the extremity of my  that could be somebody saying, I believe in absolute violence and the only way to preserve the white race is to eradicate it.

Right.  a certain demographic. Well, if we can get them to see the, the error or the flaw in that reasoning, that's change. Even if they still are racist or homophobic or whatever extremist beliefs.  Right. So, so the operationalization or the definition of change  is both through belief systems, through behavior,  and through awareness.

So, because I, I think It's so hard. Like we're getting into the weeds because change is such an elusive thing where someone can be like, well, well, I've changed and it's like, well, what does that actually mean? Right? Like it's a shift. It's some kind of,  I think it's also hard because people think of change as an on off switch rather than necessarily a toggle or something that is in process rather than something that has.

occurred in the past tense or rather than something that is occurring?  Yeah, and I think we also make the flaw that change is that you can't relapse, that you go back, that if somebody truly changes, that that behavior is  Gone forever and that's the case like you can change and still have these ebbs and flows So I think you know from us from a group level if we see somebody who claims to have changed we can't hold them to the standard that they  Can't relapse or they can't kind of  make mistakes or have regressions You know if the standard is that you only can do this and never again I think that most of us would fail at change whether it's weight loss or trying to save money Like we all you know have weaknesses, you know, and we kind of fall back on things that we planned to do at one point.

So  for this podcast, I'm wondering if in your perspective you can give why you think I put Becoming Open to Change as an essential part of having a critical conversation and why it might be the last episode. Yeah,  I guess if I had to speak for you or add to my motivation and how you did this would be, it takes both sides of it and I'm going to pull from like Braithwaite, reintegrative shaming, like somebody can serve their time, they can do their punishment.

But unless we all have an appreciation for how change occurs, that it's not on or off, that it's not absolute, that there are these ebbs and flows, it's a process, it takes time, we, I think, can, as a society, can be more empathetic. And, and that's what the next step needs to take, is we can't have this ideology of individualism. 

That anybody who's in the criminal justice system or dealing with mental illness or dealing with extremism, that it's like just their personal problem that they need to figure out and resolve alone and a lot of ways they can do the work of change, but we have to do the work of acceptance.  And we can't accept until we understand change.

Totally. And so I think for me in thinking about a critical conversation,  so often we become siloed into these belief systems. And as you're saying, even if you start kind of opening up yourself to other ideologies or other concepts or other ways of thinking,  it can be really difficult to  allow yourself. 

to disengage from the identity that you have  kind of ground into yourself because we are social creatures and I think so often we're craving connection and community and so we position ourselves in a group in opposition to another group so that we feel contained so that we feel connected and part of something and I think it can be scary and I'm sure your work can speak to this and I'm excited to get into it in the idea of  as you're stepping  into  the process of change  You're not fully accepted by the other new group or you're not accepting necessarily of their full ideology but you're also disengaging from this other group and so you're kind of walking this line of isolation in the middle and that can be a really scary lonely place and I think that's where like as you're saying that kind of outreach of acceptance.

to pull someone in or there's going to be that pull back. Um, and so, yeah, I'm curious  for you and your work, what you find as  a, the risk factors in leading to extremism and then be the protective factors in keeping people safe. Pulling someone out of that.  Yeah, and they are mirror processes. So I think that you have to explain both entry and exit together.

And so in our research, and I want to take a second here to absolutely shout out my collaborators. Pete see me, Kathleen Blee and Matthew de Michelle. They are the investigators on this project. And a lot of what I'm gonna speak on today is from data that they collected. And so throughout these interviews, we're We we did a series of life history interviews with with 91 former white supremacists throughout the United States And so we got an entire, you know spectrum of their life history It's kind of what I talked about the very beginning  for entry.

A lot of risk factors are all over evolve around Traditional criminogenic risk factors. So, you know a lack of acceptance a lack of belonging  Parents and their households are typically dysfunction histories of abuse histories of neglect. And so the movement You Kind of becomes this subculture alternative family, it becomes an outlet for them to problem solve to find acceptance and belonging and camaraderie that's going to come full circle at the end.

Okay. And so when they're in the movement becomes a totalizing experience. It becomes something they structure their entire day around from the clothes they wear to the music they listen to.  Pete has a great story where, you know, somebody was teased for bringing Dosaki's beer to a party one time because it's not a domestic beer, you know, and if you're going to drink beer with these guys, you're going to drink Budweiser and, you know, Coors, right?

And so it's little intricacies like that. So when they leave, that is like them having to leave not only Their ideology and their social connection works, but a lifestyle that they've structured this life around and that can be very intimidating So when they're in this transition period that you described where it's like I have Renounce the belief system.

I know this is no longer good for me.  Well, who do they turn to, you know, cause as a part of that totalizing commitment, they've really shut down any kind of relationships with family or friends that oppose, oppose their belief system, right? They're racist or anti Semitic and friends eventually get tired of listening to that stuff, so they drop them.

So then when they're at that moment of doubt and like, I want to try something new, they don't really have a lot of networks to rely on. So we need to provide that sense of support. Encouragement, motivation for them to say, Hey, this is an option for me to leave. Or else it becomes like, I wanna leave, but I have nowhere to go and, and even if I do leave, nobody's gonna accept me.

And then they're back at the same place they were. That got them into the movement, right? So it like comes full circle where they get rejected to join the or they are rejected, join the movement. Now they look to leave the movement and they're rejected again. As complicated as it can be, because I understand the notion of white privilege that's at play here, that we're asking to give a bunch of white males and women second chances,  that's the situation we're in.

If we don't support kind of this idea of change, if we don't open ourselves up to this idea of redemption, then we are putting ourselves in a situation to just have the cycle repeat over and over. It can be any kind of group that this person who's been abused and neglected and all these things leans into for a sense of safety and community and belonging. 

What are the factors that lead to specifically extremism or white supremacy? Is it just being exposed to that or How does the entry into that particular group begin?  Yeah, no, that was something that was really surprising that came from this, this study, is,  I think there's, there's this social, uh, assumption that a white supremacist comes from white supremacists.

Just generations of white supremacists walking around.  I think, if I, if I remember, it was only like  15 to 20 percent of our sample actually had parents that were white supremacists themselves. But the vast majority of these individuals come from racist households or homophobic households And they're being taught things that are very subtle like racist jokes.

They're being taught boundary maintenance You know don't date outside your race or don't you know, if you're gay, you know You're not going to be allowed in this household And so they're kind of receiving that programming from an early age of like  of their own racial identity that you know It's acceptable and appropriate for me to hang out with other white people and then they get to You You know, grade school and education, and then cliques start to form, and you start to see additional self segregation where they're only hanging out with other white kids.

Uh, and some of them have mentioned joining these groups as a sense of survival and protection from other black or hispanic gangs. And so that, that's in line with a lot of what we're seeing. Kind of conventional gang development as a sense of protection. Uh, but I, I think the openness to this and like why choosing white supremacy, I think it starts with that kind of culture that we see at the household and society that they see that as kind of the, as acceptable, and then they just take it to the next level.

And it's, it's really interesting. They're kind of.  armed in a way. They're given this program at a young age. They're told jokes. They're told nicknames and slogans and stuff. And then they bring that into the movement. And now that becomes kind of social capital that they can use to be like, Hey, I'm a part of this as well.

Check out this joke in a way it kind of benefits them to further integrate into that kind of lifestyle. And then what kinds of things are happening To then allow someone who's been in that lifestyle for however long to then feel like this is no longer good for me, or I no longer want to be a part of this. 

It takes time. I think in our sample, we have like an average of 10 years that they were in.  And so  it's, it's a lot like what we see with change in any other process where it becomes a stage thing where like, there's that kind of pre contemplation stage where they just don't see. Their lifestyle, the destructiveness of it.

So maybe they get incarcerated or maybe they start to develop a habit with drugs and they convince themselves that I can still continue to do this really becomes that, that initial doubt stage where something happens in their life to make them question it, that's what we're kind of really interested in right now.

And it could be as simple as like a racial out group member being nice to them and showing them compassion. And it's like, Whoa, I've been programmed that this person is my And now here they are showing me compassion. And now that becomes a crack in the foundation.  Then you start to see like, okay, you know, uh, my kids are being divided in terms of my attention.

I just don't have time to do the white supremacist thing and the parent thing. So I got to do the parent thing. And so it kind of goes back to like Hershey and our social bonds. Like they just start developing opportunities. And your belief system, your attachments, all these things start to be re reprioritized.

We, we definitely see an age crime where like they're getting, once they get into parenthood and start to have mortgages and bills and children, they're like, this is just not the priority much at. If those, those things can be further, I think, juiced or amplified with positive pull factors, like with, you know, interventions or compassion or anything that's happening outside the movement to say, Hey, you're vulnerable and you're expressing doubt in this movement.

Well, here's something positive. That's an alternative. And I think that that would be, you know, a nice off ramp for some of these people to be like, I don't want to do that.  One of the things that I've been really  on and a lot in my research is just the importance of exposure and familiarity in building that compassion and empathy.

I remember I watched this documentary. Have you watched white, right? So it's fascinating. It's you, it's right up your alley. It was done by this Muslim woman. She's the documentary, uh, artist and she follows leaders of the alt right movement. And she like gains full access. She's doing interviews.  By the end of the documentary, at least two of the leaders left the alt right movement because they specifically were like, I've become very close to you as the documentary maker and as a Muslim woman.

And I can't, I can no longer be a part of something that is so filled with hatred towards. Someone like you when I care for you now. And so it was just that exposure and gaining familiarity. And then, um, yesterday I was watching this New Yorker, I think it was New Yorker, um, short doc called stranger at the door, and it's about this It's ex Marine who was deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq and like, because of all the trauma and death that he experienced and everything he witnessed over there, he came back to the States and essentially plotted to bomb, uh, the Munsee Islam Center.

And,  So he went there, he like created the bomb, left it at home, went to the center to kind of scope it, and he's this big white guy. He walks in and immediately is embraced. by everyone. They like, welcome him in, they hug him, they serve, like, give him food, and he's like, what the fuck is this? You know, like, this is not how I imagined the Muslim people, and he leaves, he comes back, again, bombless, and he starts going, and feeling accepted, and feeling compassion from these people, and for these people, and And eventually, he totally disengages the bomb, puts all the parts, you know, sells it or does whatever, and he eventually converts to Islam, becomes the president of the Islam Center for two years, and everyone in there knew.

Like, the FBI ended up coming three months later looking for the bomb and he said, look, I, I don't have it. I have no intention. And they deemed him as not a threat. And so rumor got around that he was going to bomb it. And he was very transparent that that was his,  that was what he was going to do. And, The compassion and empathy and community that the Islam Center provided for him totally shifted his perception and now those are his family members.

And so,  exactly what you're saying, this idea of just, Small amounts of compassion and exposure in an olive branch can do worlds of change for an individual. And he said specifically, he was like, it took eight weeks for the hatred to leave my heart. I really do feel like the key to cohesion and the key to unity is compassion.

exposure and how do we then, that becomes the main question of like, in a very segregated society, how do we facilitate that?  Yeah. Well, you know, we're both educators, right? And so I think that when we try to look for opportunities in our classroom to get experiential learning, like a student can, can read it in a book and listen to his lecture, but when they actually get their hands on it, then it really sinks in.

And I think, I think those kinds of experiences that you just described where it's like a person is directly exposed to a person showing them empathy and compassion, you can't orchestrate that. That has to be genuine. It has to be authentic. The ideology has kind of a self defense mechanism built into it.

You have to be very careful. The change process takes time. And we can't rush it. And I think parents because of the social stigma that I'm talking about, you know, let's let's say we have a parent who sees their child is radicalizing and wants to do something to help. I think that you have to appreciate that that's going to be a process.

And if that person is radicalized.  They're going to have counterarguments to anything that you say, and the more that you push it, the more ingrained that they could potentially be.  So creating,  uh, a perfect argument is effortless. It's just a, it's a senseless exercise. So I think we have to look for these opportunities to create organic, Experiential things that they can put together themselves, or when that opportunity does occur, then you capitalize on it with motivation and encouragement, and you make them exercise critical thinking. 

It's about you able to look at your sense of self and be like, is this the best thing for me?  We kind of look at some of this as like a form of addiction, and not like your traditional addiction to alcohol or narcotics,  but the simple fact that  you could potentially have negative consequences in your life because of this, and you're not stopping.

You, maybe you're incarcerated because of white supremacy. Maybe you've lost all your friends and family because of white supremacy. Maybe your child is with Child Protective Services and you're being evicted. because of white supremacy, yet you still do it. Like that, that's addiction. That's what somebody would be doing with methamphetamine or alcohol.

And so we need to find those opportunities when they've hit rock bottom to be like, now's the time to intervene. Now's the time to offer that empathy and that encouragement.  Yeah. There's this group in Phoenix called White Paws and it's white people against white supremacy. And when I first moved here, I was going to some of the meetings just to kind of see what they were about, see what their tactics were  and I felt discouraged because I felt like it was just a group set up to demonize white supremacy rather than To be that lever to pull people out.

And it's hard because you want to denounce white supremacy. You want to denounce these extremist beliefs that are harmful to others. Of course. And I think that's what's so hard. And what I, in like almost every episode, this comes up because  the idea of contextualizing and understanding how someone built a violent or othering ideology.

is not saying that that is a, it's not a justification, but it's, it's a way, it's a path to understanding that person and not just seeing them as evil, right? We have to understand that those individuals have been victimized and that is what led them to this path. And so then, If we can humanize them in that way and understand that they're not just these evil monsters, if we can understand that there's a pathway, then we can also understand that there's a pathway out.

And so what is our role in walking alongside someone on their path out, or really getting into just some supportive mechanisms for that transitional period? I think that can be really hard because people  It's so funny because we want to see people change, but then we don't believe in it.  Yeah, yeah, and I think that a further nuance is like not all white supremacists are created equal in the sense of their participation.

You know, the analogy is an iceberg. The tip of the iceberg is what we see in the news of white supremacy and those are the people that are committing violence because the media loves violence. The vast majority of the people that have these beliefs and adhere to this ideology are under the water. And those are the people living next to you. 

Dentist your mailman, you know, just a co worker at work, but they don't commit violence Like they have these extremist beliefs and they have these radical ideologies, but like we don't really see them so we need to we can't just focus on a few people in the news and Generalize what they did to everybody so that that notion of change has to be Distributed differently, you know, in terms of  society's acceptance and not criminalizing the person, but the behavior with these labels of extremist or terrorist.

We're really making it off the individual evil monster, right? We're making them without redemption, without any kind of salvation or kind of path to reintegration. And we're saying you're branded. And looking at the behavior, you know, yes, they recruited people. Yes, they spread misinformation and those things need to be corrected.

But that person  is not only those behaviors,  right? And I think it's, it's tricky because I can imagine some people listening to this and being like, Oh, are they white supremacist sympathizers? You know, and I think that that's where we get caught up is the idea that if we provide sympathy for someone who has committed harm, especially from a non oppressed group. 

I don't know. I think people are so hesitant to provide that because then they see it as conflated  with propping up the belief system or not providing accountability for the harms done by those individuals. And I think that there has to be an understanding that both can exist, right? Like an individual can be held accountable, their actions can be denounced, and there can be compassion for each other.

their willingness to want to exit and their willingness to  see the harms that they did and to want to change. Because I know that there are things that I've done in the past, not around white supremacy, but just generally that I, I hope people can see that I have changed, right? And just in my relationships or, you know, with family or whatever, like I would want that.

To be acknowledged while also being like, yeah, what I did was like, I was really mean in that moment or whatever. And, or I like, we all go through periods of transition and periods of change. And it's more about the humanization rather than the. Sympathizing  every time because I've received this, you know, before where it's like, you know, looking at these things and trying to provide explanation for it could potentially create this excuse for it.

And and I think it does the opposite. If anything, I think looking at what Compelled them to do this explains their agentic moves towards it. Like I'm not stripping of them. I don't like using the word brainwashed. I think that that completely strips them of their agency and their ability to make decisions.

I think providing context to the things that happened in their past and their perspective.  You know, reality is perspective. And so understanding their perspective helps me figure out what reality they're trying to develop cheap. And, you know, if we just do the Pandora's box of. These people are mentally ill and then we just stopped talking.

It's like, well, one, a bunch of people have mental illness that don't become white supremacists. So that can't be the explanation. And then two, even those individuals that do have mental illness, it doesn't necessarily  determine that they're going to  commit an act of mass casualty violence. So I think that I understand the gut reaction to be like, Oh, this is. 

Giving them an excuse or less letting him off the hook. I think it helps us provide. Their thought process, it humanizes them in the sense of that they made a bad decision. Let's figure out what that bad decision was educate the next round. And then when it comes to kind of recruiting them in a way like I think another authentic interaction is not you or I telling somebody to not join white supremacy because of how destructive it is.

But somebody who was actually in the movement, who's an insider and says, I've been there. I've done it. Don't do this. Don't go down this route. I can tell you from my personal experiences because we, we don't have that experience. We never joined white supremacy, never would. I think that's more authentic and more. 

Yeah, I agree. It's hard because it's also like, do we want to put the onus on the people who have potentially been harmed?  To be the one to go above and beyond to provide compassion for someone who is harming them. And I think that's a tricky,  tricky question too.  Yeah, you're asking somebody who's already done a lot to do more.

For somebody who's already been privileged, right? Like, who's already received these institutional benefits of it. There's this tendency, I think, within, The white community that doesn't identify as a white supremacist to like, to be even more condemning of it and very cancel of it because they don't want to have this, um, courtesy stigma that they are then labeled as a white supremacist because they're compassionate to another white supremacist.

But you're right. I mean, it could have these unintended consequences that if somebody is trying to get out, if they're really trying to initiate change, but they don't see any form of path out of it. Why would they? In a lot of ways, it's like,  it's not rational for them to leave the only support network they have, even if it's  a white supremacist one.

I guess this would be, my recommendation would be almost like a sense of counseling. Like, I have a colleague who specifically counsels Vietnam vets. And like his research is dedicated to that point to group of individuals and he specialized in the kinds of political climate that was taking place at the time when they were welcomed back and called baby killers and the stigma that they had to resolve and go through.

So it really becomes this kind of specialized treatment. Maybe the same thing needs to occur with former extremists, that there's a certain specialized,  uh, counseling or therapy that they need to go through that allows them to kind of take ownership and accountability for it. And then when that gets into other criminal justice issues like victim offender mediation or, you know, uh, restorative justice things, like, once we get them to see that, then we can put them into already pre established channels.

I think that initial change, though, needs to be met with encouragement and motivation, or they're not going to do it. What do you think it is about our humanness that someone being kind to us can be a lover for change? Right? Like, that someone being compassionate, that someone  kind of seeing us as human or whatever can be that lover for change? 

Yeah, I think, I think it just disarms us. I don't think that we are expecting it. And I think there's a lot of things in life that  we react to with the unexpected. And like, I, I love humor. And I think that we get a lot of joy and catharsis and social benefits out of humor. And, and humor functions in that kind of very surprise way.

Most jokes, The punchline is unexpected and that kind of, it surprises us. And so that gives us that, that urge to laugh. And so I think when people are nice to us, it's like that similar  surprise and that kind of tickles our funny bone in a way it makes us feel good that like, I wasn't expecting somebody to open the door or go out of their way.

And I think, especially if you have an ideology. The implicit bias that we know exists, you're walking down the street, you see a black person, you're a white supremacist, and you're programmed to think that they're a threat, or this and that, and then they defy that, that assumption, I think it amplifies that natural shock and surprise and joy that we get out of people being nice to us, almost like times ten, because you, that's the last person that you would expect. 

Yeah, so how did you personally, like, what is your experience with change? What would you say is your experience with change and what got you interested in change?  As we educate ourselves to like a very specific topic, we even  defy our own preconceived notions. And a lot of what I found about white supremacy and about like taboo ideologies and extremist ideologies is how much they resemble conventional crime.

And I had not, I'd gone into it expecting these to be totally different, that this was like a specialized subgroup  type of criminality. So then when you start to see parallels, and you start to realize, hey, like this is a part of their criminal career or phase of their criminal career, and they don't.

Always do it. And like the story that you talked about earlier in the podcast, where it was like somebody converted, like they were going to bomb this, this church. And then they converted to that. We've seen the same. We've seen a couple of those instances where they've had complete ideological flips. And I just think that that is, that's really fascinating that somebody's capable of those full transformations, because I don't, I don't think that that's very common for people.

I think that we change, but I think we change in like more of a matter of degrees as a complete. Like identity shift. I think that change can happen over time, but I don't, I think it's rare to see people in our sample that, you know, have gone from, I'm a racist and I'm actively promoting the destruction of this race to I'm an anti racist and I'm actively promoting, you know, picking up.

I think that there's  more of this like regression to the me. So when I saw that kind of like complete flip, I wanted to know more about that.  Like I'm a new parent. And so it's really strange to see cliches that you kind of start to fall into. And so I like.  Yeah, I think that, I think there are experiences and, and reprioritizing certain things.

So it's, it's funny because a lot of the participants that we, that were interviewed talk about parenthood being this big transformation and you don't have any appreciation of it. And then you become one and you're like, oh gosh, like they were right. It is a huge transformation, you know, and you can have more understanding of what they went through and maybe the,  the challenges that they had and restructuring their lives.

Yeah. That's also an important point is like,  You're the change into parenthood.  It's component of your identity. Maybe it has changed every single aspect of your life in a way, but there are probably other aspects of your life that have remained consistent.  Despite that change, if I can add a dimension, so like I was always an academic, I was always a sibling.

I was always a son,  but it's like being married. It's like a new thing that you've never had before. So it's like this additional identity that's added to the mix. So then everything kind of gets a little shuffled, right? In terms of the percentages and the proportions of, you know, what's being what's being A part of the pie.

I think it's natural for people to kind of have a re prioritizing throughout these life phases, right? That's I think that's why it's so important to look at these individuals as a gestalt of all of their experiences as opposed to just focusing on one experience and then being like You're incapable of change because of that one thing that you did. 

Right. The intention for me in having a critical conversation is understanding. Not necessarily to sway a person to completely denounce their belief system to believe mine, or just to be open, right? That's, that's the whole point of this episode is not necessarily how to change, but how to be open to change.

Because I think what we're saying is, you know, That change is a process that happens over a long period of time. And I think a lot of people falsely assume that you can change someone in one conversation. And as that guy said, it took eight weeks, you know, of consistent showing up to actually change his heart.

One of the things that can be really difficult for just starting that process of change through dialogue and through conversation is when someone  And kind of as you were talking about with the lifestyle thing for white supremacists, like when someone's full identity is wrapped up in a belief system, like I'm part of the right, I am a Republican, I am, you know, a liberal, I am whatever.

And so I need to stay on my side and And if I even agree to some degree with something that maybe is being said by the opposing, you know, quote unquote side, then I have to challenge or question my entire sense of self. And I think that's where we need to start thinking, like, letting our ego go.  When it comes to belief systems,  you have then  situated your life in a box. 

And when you're situating your life in a box, it becomes very difficult to evolve.  Then you become stunted. And then, you know, the world is moving past you in a way that's essentially leaving you behind. And so how can we all  show some understanding, be open to ideas that may oppose the group that we identify with and not feel alone in that sense of understanding. 

Yeah, it's like, it's a classic counseling motto. Like you can only control your own behavior. You can't control anybody else's. And so like, if somebody comes to us and has a conversation maybe about change or about their belief system, and we find ourselves being defensive and resistant, I think we, you have to ask yourself, like, why am I doing this?

Not even just participating in a conversation because like that's at the end of the day. That's all it is It's low risk high reward. We can talk if you find yourself being resistant to ask yourself Why am I being resistant? Is it pride? Is it what you just outlined? Because I think you're 100 percent correct I think if people feel like they get any kind of ground to the opposition That somehow they view it as them being scored upon or taken away from their argument and so then it becomes like Even if that person has a maybe a point, or if you can empathize with the situation, you don't even have to agree with it, but you could at least say, I understand where you're coming from,  what's the harm?

You know what I mean? It could open up a further dialogue that would then allow you to provide more understanding for where that person's coming from, and then showing all the branch. Maybe if you give a little bit on, in terms of understanding and openness, maybe they'll reciprocate. The fact that often in a critical conversation, it's seen as adversarial in terms of winning and losing, right?

Like those are the outcomes. I either won the argument or I lost the argument. And I think that those are really problematic ways of measuring  whether a conversation was positive or negative. And I was just thinking about like criminal court and how we have this, again, an adversarial system that really, like, if you talk to lawyers, they use the terminology winning a case, losing a case, right?

And can you imagine if you're in a courtroom and you're a prosecutor and the defense went up and they gave their case and you as the prosecutor were like,  I can see your perspective, you know, like,  That's actually a really good point, you know, like if you opened yourself up in a vulnerable way. to the acceptance of someone else, then that, we see it as then one step towards our loss.

And so that's also why I like condemn the way that we run criminal courts, because it shouldn't be about winning and losing. It should be about healing and understanding. And what that process entails is  an openness.  hearing the other side in a way that's not immediately, okay, I hear your point. How am I going to go on the defensive?

It's like, let me hear your point and sit with it and then think about it and then make a decision whether I agree or not. And then steep that decision in science and data and like real tangible evidence to support this  position I'm holding. Because we have this adversarial conversation model where it's like, I need to win points, then we're not active listening.

And we're not actually waiting to have the person say what they want to say. We're talking over them. Even if we're letting them speak, we're actually just thinking in our head, what am I going to say next? And so they make a point that is kind of worth a further Uh, investigation or probe, then you haven't done it, you know, or you, you could ask them to clarify what they meant by that.

You don't allow for that  in my class on hate crimes. I have a 50 50 rule. You can be 50 percent of the problem, but you have to be 50 percent of the solution, you know, so you have to really look at each problem from both sides of it, because I think it's easy for people to kind of be very critical and be very, it's broken.

Let's not do it. But when you start to really start thinking about, well, what would I do to make it better, I think you really become aware of how complicated some of these issues are. And, you know, a lot of, I think of our debates, whether it's politics, it's the same thing. It's like whether Biden won or Trump won, you know, and I think we imitate that in our conversations where we just look at what the problem is.

We don't think of solutions for it. We need to practice what we all preach. We, I think we all know that a good conversation is reciprocal and that people listen and, you know, they let people  explain what they're trying to say, but then when we get into these  certain topics, It just becomes a complete either I'm right and you're wrong or vice versa. 

Yeah. Well, it's also right and wrong is subjective. And that's not to say that harm is You know, a murder or a hate crime is, you know, should be justified as like right in some, some subjective circles. But I do think that when we hold positions of right and wrong, those are our own definitions.  Yeah, well, and, and like, again, it's like, it's important to like, we can easily focus on the worst cases of like your Dylan Roofs and your Richard Spencers and like these people that are the tip of the iceberg.

But it's like, we're going to have an openness for like the vast majority of white supremacists. We have to understand that those are people that aren't committing violence. And like they have these different belief systems, but like in a lot of ways, maybe they haven't even committed a crime other than having this kind of morphed ideology.

And so, yeah, again, it's not to like minimize the harms or anything that of the violence that is, but I'm just trying to like kind of situate. Well, who we're talking about are those with kind of racist beliefs or homophobic beliefs that are the base of the iceberg, as opposed to like those that are committing mass casualty violence. 

There are people that I feel like all pull all my tricks of like, Asking critical questions, and trying to be a mirror, and being non defensive, and providing space. And yet, it's just, I feel like I'm up against a brick wall. These people are so deeply steeped in their belief system and lifestyle that, as you're saying, like, every conspiracy can't be, every good https:  otter.

ai  So, for people who are kind of at that stage where it's like, I'm right, you're wrong, I'm not hearing it. Have they given any clue  to what would have allowed them to hear in that moment?  You know, it depends. Some have said that there was, there was nothing that was going to talk them out of it and  the lifestyle provided them with that sense of  insider knowledge that they saw behind the curtain, that they were wolves among sheep and they weren't going to give that up, you know what I mean?

And so you trying to attach that idea or attack that ideology, it's going to be really difficult. Those that kind of express their initial doubts are kind of what the chinks in the armor. You know, it was a lot of them seeing the hypocrisy for themselves and maybe it's poor leadership. And so somebody in the movement is promoting a straight edge lifestyle with no drinking, no drugs, you know, being a model citizen or a model white supremacist, I guess. 

And then behind the curtain, they're doing drugs and they're embezzling money. And they're just generally a very bad person. And so they see those kinds of things. And so it.  If you're going to do anything, you have to create scenarios for them to see the hypocrisy themself. I think that parallels addiction to alcohol and drugs.

Hey, has anything improved in your life since you've Started doing this habit because it seems like it's kind of falling down around you and then you maybe start to highlight some of those things we should be viewing the willingness to change as like a golden ticket. If somebody is willing to change, we need to maximize that opportunity because it could close and then then you have this issue where it's like, how do we get into that armor?

How do we chink across that? That defense? But if they show that crack in the fissure, we gotta be like, water, seep in there, let it freeze and crack that thing open, you know. And so we should be viewing this as an opportunity, like a great opportunity, not as like something that's like, well, they need to take the first step, you know, and they need to change before I'm willing to meet them.

We want real change. Like if we want true systematic change, I think that's where we have to ask ourselves, like, why would I be defensive to this? If I am an anti racist and I really want to end white supremacy. Why would I be resistant to converting somebody away from it? You know what I mean? I know that that's. 

That's a difficult conversation. That's a difficult decision, but that's what we're doing, right? It's like we need to ask ourselves What is the resistance to maybe helping that person out of  a destructive social movement?  Yeah, then there's someone with the olive branch who's like, okay, I see you want to change I'm going to walk alongside you and then there has to be people behind that person who's like We're going to support you in giving that olive branch rather than stigmatize you in walking alongside someone that we didn't believe in. 

Even if you're like a tertiary support system, like that's  because, you know, in the court of public opinion, if we are just canceling all of this. It becomes the problem that we see with drug addiction. If we don't provide the support for them to be, to live a clean lifestyle, they're going to go back to it.

You know, it's what do you want? Do you want this kind of, uh, like rotating door where they're just like in and out of white supremacy over and over again? Cause they couldn't get their footing. Sometimes I go down these rabbit holes where I, look at because it just out of like pure sociological curiosity of what some of the extreme, not extreme, but like Candace Owens or like whoever these kind of like  Right, Trumper people who have these platforms.

And I'm just out of curiosity, interested to hear what some of their  points are.  And I find such shame when there are some points where I'm like, yeah, I don't.  I don't totally disagree there, you know? And I'm like, not necessarily that I'm like, rah, rah, I agree. But just an openness of like, huh, that would be an interesting conversation that I kind of want to unpack further. 

Does this mean that I'm like,  you know, and I think there's a lot of shame there. And so. For people who maybe are like more open to having a more bipartisan perspective or for someone who  has a friend who is very steeped in their personal ideology and who as that friend wants to kind of engage and have them be more understanding, like what are some of the tangible steps that you see as working towards Both changing the self and facilitating change in others. 

Yeah, I think I would parallel it to like a regular conversation I might have with you about education. I'm not going to just be like, Hey, tell me about teaching. Like maybe we center the conversation about a methodology class or statistics class. And then within that, we talk about experiential exercises and assignments that we can create.

So I'm like, I'm giving the conversation kind of a focus. And then what we can also do is maybe agree on some assumptions like that. We are both. student centered educators. And then we at least can fall back on that  common ideology. That we, whatever the assignment may be that we are talking about, we can fall back on the idea that we're going to put the student first.

I think we need to do a better job of that when we fall into these political conversations or religious conversations. Typically, it's something we see on the news that sparks it, and then we're off to debating it, like we talked about, as opposed to like, I want to have a conversation with you about, um, Same sex marriage or abortion rights, like maybe we can start these very contentious conversations with a point of focus with a common uniting assumption so that no matter which track we go down in this conversation, if it gets out of control, we can at least say, Hey, well, we agree on this.

Now let's go back to that conversation. Like, let's set the conversation up for success. By being somewhat focused on a topic, and then that topic is grounded in uniting assumptions. I like, I don't, I don't, I think this idea of debating complete strangers is, it's like, again, setting the conversation up for success.

Like, you know, know your audience and know, like, what you're going to talk to, so that, that, that, I guess, intervention, if you want to call it that, or that conversation,  Uh, can have the best chance for success from the get go. Yeah, right. Again, that like, exposure and familiarity, not only in facilitating change, but also facilitating,  um, effective conversation. 

The marriage advice I got was like, never go to sleep. Angry, you know, and so like make sure whatever that conversation is that you can like in the conversation on something positive So  that you can revisit it because another I think trend from our conversation today is change takes time And so it's not going to be one conversation Don't like expect this drawn out four hour Marathon of conversion and at the end of it, they're going to be enlightened.

It's probably going to be dosages and badges So like it's not worth  You know, having this all out brawl and then never talk again.  For me, something that I often find with debating abolition versus reform, especially around prisons or police is  you and I like you as a reformist, me as an abolitionist, like not necessarily you, just the general you the intention for both of us is decreased victimization and harm.

Right. So we can agree on that. So if we both have that  desired outcome, then we're on the same team. Right. And we can acknowledge that. And I think that that's  like the idea, even in a relationship, right? Like I, it, when I'm in conflict with my partner, I'm always like, I want, like, we're on the same team here, right?

Like we're a unit and I don't want it to be me versus you. Like I want it to be unified. And so in a conversation with someone who hopefully you care about, you can  Look, we're on the team of humanity, right? Like we want the betterment of all. And that's hard because then you do have some people who are like, well, no, I'm just for the betterment of white people, you know?

And so then how do you, how do you find that focal point? And I think that's kind of the first step in what you're saying is identifying the commonality that you share.  Well, I mean, a pathway you could go with that is like the family, like we know what the, what the family means for them. And that ideology is very strong with.

Supporting patriarchal norms, and so if you can focus on the family and you can create a pivot point to children,  what would you do for your child? I would do anything for my child. Okay, you want to support your child, right? You would protect your child, right? Well, why wouldn't this family also want to do that?

And then now you humanize a black family or Hispanic family because of their shared desire for their children. Like what makes them less worthy of protecting their child than you? You use their own logic and reason against them. If they love their family and they expect other people to love their family, then you don't want to take that away from them because they don't want that to be taken away from them.

If you can already start the conversation with a sense of like,  Being on the same team, you know, a win, I guess, for the conversation, like, yes, we both agree on this, then that, that, that's a good momentum to take the conversation further. And I guess maybe if you can't find that joint commonality, then you're not ready to talk.

But if it, if it becomes too hard to find any kind of common ground, Then maybe you're not the best person to speak to them. Maybe somebody else needs to speak to them.  That's a very good point.  So for me, what I'm seeing is find commonality, find your place, understand that change is a process,  lead with understanding rather than an intention of winning or losing,  and  the importance really of support and community.

Because.  As social creatures, I think our biggest fear is isolation and that is what keeps us in ideologies and that is what keeps us from  taking the step out because that first step can feel really isolating if there's no one on the other side to catch you. So who's going to take it on as being the catcher and how can that catcher then also be supported to not feel shame and stigma in their process of assistance? 

Yeah, well said that that stigma part I think is really important. It's key that a lot of change is going to involve certain stigmas. And so to even like that stigma is socially applied, like from a level, right? So in that capacity, it takes a lot of us to help out. Just because  social construction of it. 

So I'm, I'm asking all my guests just at the end, what are the three things keeping your attention right now? Whether it's a podcast, a show, a movie, a book, something in the media, just  your family, whatever, what are the three things that are keeping your attention right now? Uh, well, until two nights ago, uh, the Phillies were in the playoffs and the Eagles won.

So right now, you know, Philadelphia sports has got a little bit of our attention. You know, I guess on a serious note, like the next cycle of 2024 election, I'm really focusing on that. We are seeing a lot of threats and violence against election officials and kind of attacking the legitimacy of the election.

So I'm really interested to see. The potential transition from extremist beliefs and political language to maybe extremist action, you know, death threats, intimidation, kind of stalking and harassment of election officials who historically just have not even been involved as an adversarial of elections.

Like they just have had no role before  2020, but now they're kind of being thrust into the main stage. So, you know, I'm curious to see how local state federal law enforcement. Provide protections to them. And I'm interested to see how the kind of political pundants and the dialogue around the election is maybe amplified through social media and on these kind of nationally syndicated networks.

And then the third thing?  I'm trying to think what has my attention right now in terms of like, is there any TV shows or anything I have on my mind? I cannot think of a third one.  Your kid. Your kid is  sucking all the energy.  ASC is in a couple of, well, I guess by the time this is aired, ASC will have already been gone.

But, uh, yeah, yeah, I guess family. Yeah, that's, that's a good one.  We'll throw that one in.  Well, thank you so much for speaking with me today. Yeah, I appreciate the invitation and, uh, I love what you're doing. So keep it up, please. 

Thank you so much for joining me in my critical conversation with Dr. Stephen Wittich. This was the final step. Step 10 in this season's 10 episode toolkit for having a critical conversation. Some of my standout takeaways from this episode were the idea that becoming an extremist is a process of change from an inherently neutral start at birth.

So this observation solidifies that change out is possible and that we are in constant flux due in large part to our experiences. So while later in life, Habits and belief systems can be difficult to break. It's certainly not impossible. It just requires patience and compassion from those around the individual expressing a desire for change.

Of course, this is complicated and still requires accountability, but it's There needs to be humanization and kindness to incentivize change. Another simple, yet significant concept for me was that change doesn't necessarily happen through just one conversation, and the importance of finding and noting commonality to see how before getting into the conversation.

Drawing on other episodes, I think this is where identifying and explicitly stating the intention of the conversation is important, and to approach the conversation with curiosity rather than defensiveness. To recognize the humanity in the other person despite their ability to harm. If the conversation is harmful to you, however, this is This is where it's important to recognize that you don't necessarily need to be the vehicle for every conversation, and there might be someone who can just handle it better or better connect with the individual. 

Despite there being so much information in these last ten steps, I feel like there's just So I hope you'll continue exploring these critical concepts with me in the upcoming season. But until then, look out for some bonus episodes that include the Q& As and some breakdowns of the steps featuring some special surprise guests. 

If you've enjoyed this season, I would love to hear your feedback, so please text or email me. The contact info can be found in the show notes. And all of the links to the guests  are in the show notes as well. So you can start a book club based around this podcast, whatever you do. I just hope that you dig deeper and continue exploring and getting into these crucial steps to not only having meaningful conversations, but also just being a better person.

And if we can all get there. Becoming a better society. So stay critical, stay connected, be sure to subscribe, share, leave a review, and I'll see you next time.