The Waging Peace Podcast

Sharon McMahon's Guide to Bridging American Cultural Gaps

• Diana K. Oestreich • Season 2 • Episode 13

Share episode

Send us a text

Sharon McMahon, America's Government Teacher and creator of Sharon Says So, joins Diana to discuss being Minnesotan,  complexities of cultural identity and its relationship with democracy, focusing on how allegiance to group identity can overshadow commitments to national values. 

Through an engaging discussion, Sharon & Diana underscore the importance of hope and the power of making meaningful change.  

• Exploration of white evangelicalism as a cultural identity 
• The tension between cultural membership and national allegiance 
• The role of discomfort in driving change and progress 
• Bryan Stevenson’s perspective on hope as a choice 
• The need for visionary leadership in shaping future solutions

About Sharon:
A #1 New York Times bestselling author, educator, and host of the chart-topping podcast Here’s Where It Gets Interesting. Sharon's newsletter, The Preamble, is one of the largest publications on Substack, where she provides historical context and non-partisan insights to help readers navigate today’s political landscape. 

IG: @sharonsaysso 

This is a growing podcast, will you take 30 seconds and help us?

Yes! I will sign up to get the newest episode delivered by owl to my inbox!

Heck yeah! I will leave a review because I know how much it help

Diana Oestreich:

So, everybody, I have Sharon McMahon on here and we have not even pressed record and we've gotten into like six things that I was just like, oh my gosh, talking about this with my friend, but talking about with Sharon is even more fun.

Sharon McMahon:

So, sharon, welcome, thank you. Thanks for inviting me. I appreciate the invite.

Diana Oestreich:

Well, last time we were together we had a lot of fun making a lot of jokes. I don't think people know that Minnesotans are funny.

Sharon McMahon:

They are, and Minnesotans love nothing more than Minnesota. So all you got to do is throw up a topic about Minnesota and Minnesotans will want to talk about it. Which lake are you going to for Memorial Day weekend?

Diana Oestreich:

And we just talked about our plants and the cold. Another, it's so chilly.

Sharon McMahon:

I complained about. It's too chilly out there, I'm tired of wearing my sweaters and it's time to be summer now.

Diana Oestreich:

Yeah, and if you and I bump into each other at the grocery store today, which we could, because, shout out to Duluthuthians we will talk about this again. About the weather and about where, where. What are we doing for memorial day? The unofficial vacation, camping, uh, kickoff of the summer, though we know it will rain and it's cold and it's cold, yeah, and we're gonna talk about uh.

Sharon McMahon:

oh, yeah, you know, I have my so-and-so relative is coming to visit and I told him they should bring a coat and it's going to be chilly. You just never know. Yeah, if we ran into each other at the grocery store later, we'd have to do a weather update. It doesn't matter if we talked about it a few hours ago. We would need to talk about how the weather has shaped up throughout the course of the day and what the updated forecast for Memorial Day weekend is.

Diana Oestreich:

It's true, and I love these things all Minnesotans, we're very low key, but we're funny and we have our passion points Weather being one of them. So before we started recording, we had already talked about how white evangelicalism is pretty outsized as far as extremism. So you had just said this really wild thing about how white evangelicalism is not a set of beliefs, it's a cultural identity. Could you share more about that?

Sharon McMahon:

Well, of course it's not saying that people who belong to an evangelical church, who happen to be white, it's not that they don't have a set of religious beliefs, because they do and they're entitled to them and they should believe what they feel is right. So that's not a criticism. And the point I was trying to make is that there is, as much as Americans may not realize it, a very strong cultural identity surrounding white evangelicalism, and this has been true for a long time. But it really began to solidify during the civil rights movement, when white evangelicals banded together to try to begin to achieve certain political objectives. And one of the big things that white evangelicals, particularly in the South, were passionate about during the 1950s was maintaining a system of segregation. That was a very, very important cultural and political thing for them.

Sharon McMahon:

And again, I don't need anybody to DM me and be like not all white evangelicals, I'm not talking about you. Okay, if you need to DM me and be like, well, I don't think that that is fantastic. I'm speaking in broad generalities extrapolated across the population here, not about any individual in particular, of the churches that hosted things like KKK gatherings, et cetera. They were white evangelical churches and, in fact, entire denominations popped up around this idea that we needed to maintain a system of segregation. Many of the private religious schools that started in the South during the 1950s began as what people of the time referred to as segregation academies, where they only admitted white students, and it was a way to keep white students away from having to integrate with Black students. So that's really certainly not the only example from history that I can give you, but that's really where this white, evangelical, modern cultural identity begins to solidify.

Diana Oestreich:

What I think is the universal thread here and I'm very curious about that we can draw is what white evangelicals had. You're describing as a cultural identity, and what we also have as kind of a cultural identity is a lot of patriotism. So I feel like I'm a third generation army veteran flags everywhere and there's also this very strong cultural identity that we support our country and we support our military and we are very loyal. We have an allegiance, we pledge allegiance to the flag. This is a very strong cultural identity.

Diana Oestreich:

But what we're seeing when you look at civil rights and segregation is people's cultural identities are trumping their allegiance to their country because their country had said segregation is no longer legal. In fact, it is not who our country is and we are done with it. So there's this allegiance to their country that says this isn't us, we're no longer going to deny voting rights and we're no longer going to allow segregation of our citizens. So when push comes to shove between their loyalty to their country and their democracy and the way that this process has decided on the laws of the land, their cultural identity won out, so much so that we saw the National Guard being come in because they refused to go along with their country. Which is pretty fascinating because, again, when we look at cultural identity and maybe the Confederate flag, when you look at the allegiance to the country which said our country and our democracy says slavery is no more and this is what our country is for, they said, democracy says slavery is no more and this is what our country is for.

Diana Oestreich:

They said nah, we'll get our own country then instead, and they're still really proud of it. So I look at this. I'm like, wow, sharon, we have this like very strong identity that we support our country, and our country is first, and yet when it pushes up against our personal cultural identity, that seems to be what people choose, or a certain group of folks choose.

Sharon McMahon:

That's right. A certain segment of the population will choose their membership in a group over their allegiance to their country, its citizens and the Constitution. Their membership in the group is so important to them at an identity level that to do anything to endanger their membership in the group and what I mean by endanger their membership is if you contradict what the prevailing beliefs are within the group, if you take actions that are outside of the group's norms, if you perhaps challenge members of the group and say I don't know if that's how it should be. If you are to take any of those actions, your membership in the group could be in jeopardy and the idea of being kicked out of a group that is very, very important to you. And some of this is happening subconsciously, right Well yeah.

Sharon McMahon:

We don't even necessarily. We're not necessarily being like first I'll press button A, then action B will happen. We're not necessarily making a step one, two, three, four, five choice. Your brain is making these choices for you because it believes what it is doing is keeping you safe. Membership in a group keeps you safe. That is how humans have evolved. Right, we have to be in a group in order to not be picked off by wolves, in order to have enough food to eat. We need to cooperate with each other. So we have evolved to be part of a community, and the shape of communities has evolved as human society has evolved. But our deep-seated subconscious-level need to be accepted in a group that has not evolved. So when you think about abandoning or jeopardizing membership in a group, that is something that people just cannot do, for some people just cannot do. I cannot jeopardize my membership in this group and I would rather stay with the group than I would adhere to a set of principles. Adhere to a set of principles.

Diana Oestreich:

And there's a promise that this group maintains the system. And so we look that there's a very strong movement that longs to maintain the system, whether that was slavery, whether that was segregation, whether that still is women and autonomy. There's this group and the membership. You stay in the group and the group tends to say that they will maintain a system that is familiar, that is comfortable, that tends to center your rights and your well-being.

Diana Oestreich:

And so there's a two-way street on that, but when we look at where progress has been made as human beings, it's always come from changing those systems and from people who said, no, that system's got to go, this status quo, not it. And so it's fascinating that there has been change, and it typically has always come from people who have not maintained the system but been willing to move ahead.

Sharon McMahon:

And that is, change is always painful and not necessarily. You know, I'm not saying like, oh, change is like your child dying. I'm not saying it's necessarily that level painful, but again, from an evolutionary perspective, your brain wants to keep you safe and avoid discomfort. And so there's you know you've probably heard this phrase like there's no growth in your comfort zone. And there's no comfort in your growth zone, it is uncomfortable to change.

Sharon McMahon:

It's uncomfortable to work out and to change your muscles and your body composition Physically uncomfortable, mentally uncomfortable. A lot of people are like I don't want to do that. That's terrible. It's also uncomfortable to change systems that exist because it requires a tremendous amount of effort and that effort is tiring and people yell at you for making the effort and you feel like nothing I'm doing is changing anything. It's not just, it doesn't even matter. It's easier to revert to cynicism, because cynicism is just simpler, to be like nothing we do will change anything. So this idea that change happens as a result of discomfort that is the reason why people work so hard to maintain the status quo is because it actually feels bad to work to change it.

Diana Oestreich:

Have you talked about evolutionary? There is the Jewish historian who wrote the you know like bestselling book called Sapiens Yuval Hari, and when he talks about the evolutionary stuff just kind of like you know, like we're a blip and but this is what has been true for all time. So many things make so much sense. One he said that the cave woman, her biggest issue of survival was childcare. Yeah, because once somebody has a small thing to care for, you can't shelter yourself, you can't feed yourself, and I was like that's hilarious because, as a woman, I have heard many people say that childcare is the number one issue for women around the globe Childcare of just their survival, their existence, their futures, their stability. And I was like well, couldn't we have figured that out from like cave woman today? But he also talks a lot about evolutionary as a species, that war is a negative for us and so, as a species, very bad, we should be working for something that doesn't annihilate a whole nother group of people.

Sharon McMahon:

It's just very costly Evolutionary is costly on all these things.

Diana Oestreich:

So he's been talking a lot about that today and I was like but why is it that culturally, we feel like it is much right and identity of valor to be fighting wars instead of thinking 10 years ahead of how do we avoid this? Because's bad, it's negative for generations, is negative for our species, our planet, and it's kind of proven to be pretty negative. So why do you think we have such a hard time imagining that we could, as a culture and a worldwide community, work differently or all conflicts?

Sharon McMahon:

Yeah, I mean, I think it goes back to this idea that the human brain is highly motivated by immediacy. It's highly motivated by like if I do this thing, then I'll get a reward, then I'll get something yummy to eat, then I'll be able to have the thing that I want. Humans, just biologically speaking, are not that good at doing things that are in our long-term best interest. Right, like. We are actually born not even understanding that concept. Understanding that concept, children don't understand what it means to be like whoa. You better eat a balanced diet, because when you're 11, you're going to wish blah, blah, blah. You can tell kids that and it means nothing because their brains have not developed that ability to think in the abstract future.

Diana Oestreich:

Well, and when we look at kids at you know the five-year-old birthday party and we're like no, you can't have the biggest piece of cake and everybody else gets. Hardly anything Like that makes sense when we tell a kid that. But when we look at adults in their adult lives and jobs, we kind of applaud taking the biggest piece of cake.

Sharon McMahon:

It's because you're smart. It's because you're smart, it's because you're the smartest and the strongest, and humans like being around successful people, because your success is my success. Like these are just the biological norms. Now here's the thing we have now developed as a sapien species. We have now developed a prefrontal cortex that allows us to override those base instincts of like oh, you look different, you're a stranger, you're scary.

Sharon McMahon:

That is your brain looking for a difference in pattern, a pattern disruption. That's how your brain is determining if something is a threat to you or not. Right? This food is new. I don't know what it is. Is it poison? Do you know not? Right? This food is new. I don't know what it is. Is it poison? Do you know what I mean? Like these are the way that your brain makes these kinds of decisions throughout time and space. Fortunately, now we know that we don't have to be ruled by our reflexive impulses of like you look different, you sound different, you smell different. Thus, you are a threat to me. That is what your brain wants you to think, but we actually can tell it to think otherwise, and that requires effort, and the effort is painful, diana.

Diana Oestreich:

Right, I'm with you Absolutely. I feel like Diana. If Diana met Diana today, she'd be like what, who are you? Well, I would not have liked her. I would have had a lot of shade to throw on her.

Diana Oestreich:

But one of the things that I love that you do, Sharon, is that you are putting yourself on the Internet, which I feel like not a lot of women want to do, because, omg, right, but you are putting a different voice that says here's what we can do and here's our choices, kind of like that. Yeah, it's gonna be uncomfortable, right, if we listen to people who are from a different political party. Yeah, it's going to be uncomfortable, but we're going to grow because we need to, and also it's dignifying for us if we can be curious, if we can work together and if we can question what we know. So one of the things I was thinking about is who are the leaders that are imagining what we need 10 years from now, like when we're looking at people and they're like problem solvers for today great, but I'm like.

Diana Oestreich:

But leaders are people that are actually envisioning a solution and a reality. That's 10 years down the road and it should scare us a little today Because, like you said, we're going about our life and this is what I do, and I go to the same grocery store and the same things are comfortable. But who is somebody that you have listened to and been challenged by them or leaders that you think like, whoa, they are imagining 10 years from now, the solutions and a reality that most people and politicians and leaders are? You know, they're just like they're making the same sandwich every day and just talking about how the same sandwich is going to be the best sandwich and what we need to do. So who's somebody who you've heard that either is exciting to you or kind of scares you a little bit but makes you think, huh, they might be that 10 years ahead and visioner.

Sharon McMahon:

Yeah, I mean, sometimes in years like this one, you know where we are, at the end of a global pandemic, and we are sort of like poking our heads out of the bear cave and being like, well, what's happening over here? You know, like we're just sort of reintegrating with society and we are faced with an upcoming, very fractious election that is just a few months away. This is a time when people are especially craving comfort, because we have just endured years of incredible discomfort the death of our family members, the death of some of our businesses, the children who missed school. I don't need to tell you all the things that were really challenging about the last few years. And then now we're looking a few months ahead and we're like I just can't do it. I just I can't do it again. I don't want to do it again, like 80% of Americans actually don't want another election, like 2020 was. I'm just not interested. I'm not interested in any of this. 0%, Thank you.

Sharon McMahon:

So this idea that we should be visionary thinkers is a challenging one to sell right now, diana, because of what we have been through and because we are now kind of in a state of we're now in like a survival mode, we're kind of hunkering down into this, like I can't do it again. I don't want to do it again. I mean, I know you probably know exactly the feeling I'm talking about. If you don't feel it, you know people that do. So that's not to say there are no visionary thinkers right now. It's just to say that this is a time in the political cycle in which people are looking for like a sense of just a little tiny bit of hope to hold on to. You know what I mean? I just need somebody to help me keep going another day. I just need another, like I need to make it through the weekend with my kids and the news and like all the things.

Sharon McMahon:

So to me, I am always looking for people who are able to bring that element of hope to the table, because it seems as though there are two types of people who make it big in the public square People who are deeply into maintaining the status quo and railing against anybody who wants change, and people who are trying to create a revolution. Those are the two people who tend to be like spotlight on those people, and that feels uncomfortable right now for many. What a lot of people really need is like I just hope I live through the night. And I don't mean like physically I might be dead by morning, I mean mentally, like I just I am burned out. I am really burned out. I need a reason to keep going. It's almost like it's almost like this idea that you know a patient arrives at the ER one night having gotten a gunshot wound and then the doctor reads their chart and is like, oh, but you also have cancer. Well, the patient needs to be treated in the ER for the gunshot wound before we can deal with the cancer.

Diana Oestreich:

You know what I mean and I think there's one of the things that is so real that I think many people are experiencing is we have never had an insurrection before. Yeah, add that to the list Like losing the faith or the trust, or believing that our democracy knows how to respond to that and can, because you know, like that hasn't even really been, um, laid to rest and so like, like you said, it's an open wound and it also I feel like this lack of trust and a little bit of hopelessness being like oh man, they've had four years to like figure out.

Diana Oestreich:

Hey, if there's an insurrection, this is what happens in our country, so that everybody else knows if you want to do it again, this is exactly what will happen.

Sharon McMahon:

Here's the step. Here's how to do it again. Here's how you failed before and here is how you can fix it, so it works this time.

Diana Oestreich:

Right. So I feel like that is a little terrifying and since there isn't the trust that our systems have really responded to that, it's not like you get in a car crash and everybody makes like now we have airbags, so we feel safer. We know car crashes can happen again, but we have created, invented, responded to these air with it with airbags, so we still feel a little bit stronger than before, like, yes, but now we know what is going to insulate us. Now we know what's going to keep the things we value and the people we care about safe, even if a car crash happens. I don't feel like that's happened.

Sharon McMahon:

Mm, hmm, we have not rebuilt the scaffolding around this sort of fragile system. We used to feel like, yeah, but we've built these democratic institutions that will protect us. The institutions will protect us, help us weather the storm and for many people, the institutions, the illusions of the protection of the institutions have been destroyed or at least significantly damaged. And you know like if you have a dock that gets really damaged in a severe, severe storm, the next time a storm happens you're like I don't know if the dock is going to make it.

Diana Oestreich:

You know, like that is how people are viewing it right now and it's really true because, yes, we have an upcoming election, but I don't think that we know and can trust that if someone doesn't win it still will count as an election. And what happens if people have decided they're not really going to accept not winning, decided they're not really going to accept not winning, and for that alone it is scary. They were even having another election. It's like, oh, my gosh.

Sharon McMahon:

So one of the one of the people that whose work I really admire I'm sure you're very familiar with is Brian Stevenson, who is a civil rights lawyer. He started the equal justice initiative Initiative and I have a book club like a private group, and we read his phenomenal bestseller Just Mercy a couple of years ago and we invited Bryan Stevenson to come speak to us and he did and it was fantastic. And one of the things that I've really really clung to from his work that I think is an important thing for all of us to remember is that hope is not a feeling that we are going to experience the way that we think we experience feelings. Hope is not a, you know, it's not going to descend upon us from a beam of light and we're not going to be like now I feel hopeful again. That's what I think people are waiting for. They're waiting to feel the feelings of hope.

Sharon McMahon:

But I love what Bryan Stevenson had to say, which is that hope is a choice. Hope is a choice that we must make every morning because we do not have the luxury of giving up hope. Giving up hope says I am fine with everything remaining exactly as it is, because we cannot make change without hope. So this is something that we have to use engage our prefrontal cortexes and do we have to choose every morning to continue to have hope, because from hope is where change can occur. Hopelessness does not bring positive change. Only with the choice to have hope will help us make positive change.

Diana Oestreich:

And I would add to that that action is the antidote to despair, because, like you said, it is hard to have hope and then sometimes it's hard to show up and do the thing anyways, even though you are not convinced that it is going to matter, that it's worth the cost.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Diana K Oestreich

Host