CARL
ROGERS AND RUTH SANFORD
"IN CONVERSATION" at UCT Capetown
exciting time
to be here. And I'm deeply privileged to be here.
Since 1972,1
have known Carl and increasingly have worked at home and the Center for
Interpersonal Growth on Long Island, part-time teaching at the university, at
Long Island University and a small private practice of my own, I have become
more and more interested in the international visits which we've taken in Mexico,
in Hungary, in Ireland and in various places in the United States. So that's a
little bit about me and I guess, Carl, they'd like to know a little more about
you.
I've been much interested in
more student centered point of view in education.
Somewhat to my surprise, a
great many people in business and organizational
development have
found the same principles useful in management and in business
enterprises. The
field of pastoral counseling has drawn heavily on my work. Then I became
involved more and more with intercultural and interracial groups. I began to be
particularly interested in groups where antagonisms existed or rather where
tensions and conflict, not only within individuals, but between individuals.
And so, I and some colleagues worked with a group from
As Ruth says, we've worked with
an interracial workshop in
I'm here because we're invited
back. As Ruth says, that is a pleasure. I'm here because I'm fascinated by the
crisis that this complex country is going through. I've been learning a great deal, hope to learn a great deal more. I hope I can
contribute some things too.
I'm here too because we were
invited back long ago. We began planning this in 1984 and we finally decided
that if a group of mixed races could be brought together, if they would be
interested in facilitating groups because that was one of the main questions we
heard in 1982, how can I learn how to facilitate better communication between
groups? So if we could get together a group interested in learning to
facilitate communication of mixed colors and races and classifications, if they
could have a chance after a brief, intensive workshop to also be the service
facilitators in some other situation, then we certainly would come. And all
that has come to pass in
or
herself than when he came.
So it's a matter of sharing and
learning also from groups here, and from individuals, ways in which we may
change and expand and deepen our own understandings of the skills with which we
work.
If we can initiate that
process, it is a self-directing process. It's true of individuals; it's true of
the group as a whole. People don't quite believe, but it is true, that we
approach a group without specific aims or goals. We simply know that if the
group is willing to empower itself, to take charge, to begin to express
themselves individually and gradually in more collective terms, they will ooze
into a process which is constructive, which makes for
change in
individuals and in group behavior and it will be a constructive outcome. Then I
would stress again the word "process." People these days are eager
for a quick fix or to get things done right now, what's going to happen
immediately. This is a process. It's a process which starts during the time
we're in the group but it also continues afterward. I often think that probably
more goes on outside of the group than in the group and sometimes very powerful
things. So, that's a little bit of what we try to do.
the
unfolding of that process that goes on and on for whatever periods of time we
have.
Whether it's two or three hours
or half a day or a full day or fourteen days, it seems to unfold
in
whatever period of time we have to do it. I'm interested too that something of
the same
process takes
place in therapy. I'm always surprised all over again when a client realizes
that
there's going
to be a break, now like when I came here six weeks. And how much gets done
in the
last two or three sessions before that? And when someone is moving away and
we'll be
terminating, how
much happens in those weeks between the time of knowing that there will
be a
separation and the time when it really happens. I think that's a part of my
feeling as Carl
has said
about a group. I trust that group not to go where I might have had some
preconceived notions
but to go wherever they are ready to go at that time and at their own
pace if I
don't get in the way.
ROGERS: One thing you said about what happens when
time is short and so on brings me to a realization of that's why it's so
exciting here now. The time is short and everyone is very much aware of that.
The time is short for the country and so we find people thinking about change
and
wondering what
they can do to bring about change. The fact that this is a crisis has made the
groups we've
dealt with go much deeper, I think, in a more profound way than would have been
true if
this had been a very peaceful period.
I want to say another word or
two about what we do or how we go about it. We're eager to set a
psychological
climate and it's very strange the way that comes about. I realize it comes
about
mostly by our
way of being. That's a strange thing to say but what we're talking about is not
a
technique. It's
not a strategy. It's not a method. It's something that is based on a whole
philosophy of
being and it is that that we represent, I think, in the group. There are other
aspects to it.
When I'm in a group I really want to understand as sensitively and deeply as I
can what is being expressed. I think one of the rarest experiences in the life
of anyone of us is to be deeply heard and understood and not judged, simply
heard and accepted. That kind of nonjudgmental, empathic listening is something
I endeavor to do when I'm in a group and when I'm really sensitive and really
understand deeply, it's a very powerful element. I feel that when I can
unconditionally accept the other person that helps. That
helps the process- That unconditional acceptance is often misunderstood.
It isn't something that 1 can feel or I think anyone can feel all of the time
for everyone but when there are the moments in which I unconditionally accept
you as a person, just as you are right now, that's a very healing, very
releasing experience. And when I can be very genuine and real
in everything that I'm doing, when 1 can be very present in the group, fully
present, without facade, without any white coat, either real or imaginary, that
seems to help to initiate the process. So those are some of the things 1
think that are important in setting a climate.
in mind
and that means when I say person-centered, meaning putting value in the person,
it
means that I
put value in the other person but I also put value in myself. And if I don't
have a
trust and a
regard in myself then 1 can't genuinely feel that for another person and unless
that
trust in the
other person that she is trustworthy, that the human organism is a trustworthy
organism, that
given the climate which Carl has spoken of, the psychological climate, can
reach toward
the full potential, becoming a more fully functioning person as a whole person.
Unless 1 really have that trust, I can't fake it. If I have that trust in
the person and I know that
that person
knows better than I know where he is going, where he needs to go, what he needs
to
do, then
it doesn't work. 1 will have to make a confession here. I have a very real
indifference
with the
word "training." Somehow it doesn't fit and yet I don't know a better
word for it and a
group of
people say, "I would like to come and work with you for a period of time
because I
want to be
able to facilitate groups in my own community." But it's impossible for a
person to
be
"trained" in a way of life. It has to be lived first if it's going to
have real meaning, so, it seems like a simple way of working with groups,
working with another person in a therapeutic situation and yet it is very
complex. It is very delicate and it is important for a person to feel it from
inside if it's going to work.
ROGERS: I think perhaps we've
said enough to indicate that facilitating, whether an individual or a group, is
a very subtle and complicated function, not a showy function at all, yet
somehow enormously powerful. I've been interested in myself in recent years to
realize that I think I say less in each group that I'm in. Someone spoke to me
about the meetings here in
the
person, that core is constructive. It's positive, it's forward moving. In every
sense it is trustworthy and I think that's one of the primary elements on which
this whole approach is based.
Well, we could talk a little
bit about what happens in the groups that we worked with. We haven't talked
this over very much but I think we're drawing examples from various groups that
we've worked with not only in this country perhaps but elsewhere, trying to
give a little picture of what this process is like. Ruth said that people often
are critical because they feel enough leadership is not being given. I think of
the groups we've held here. There's certainly been
individuals who've
been highly skeptical, who have come to the group feeling "it's too late
for talk in
something was mentioned about
acceptance, he said, "I want it known that I cannot accept anyone who is
not anti-racist, anti-bourgeois, anti-capitalist," which put him in a
pretty fairly definite position I felt and so we've had a variety of people
coming into the group and white people who feel that it's too late for talk
also or who are definitely wedded to the system that is.
SANFORD: I'm thinking too of a
period which quite often comes when there are groups of really sharp differences
when they begin to look into themselves and to hear other people and they begin
to realize how far apart they really are. They begin to realize how deeply the
prejudices are. They see that in themselves and they are terrified. "This
is a part of myself which I hate. I didn't
know it was
there but there it is." And then it may be that those persons in dissident
positions begin to get frightened about the group. They say, "Oh this is
worse than it was before. We're really polarizing here in this group and I
really wish I hadn't come because I'm feeling worse than I did before."
But if we can ride that out, if we can accept that that's where people are, then
they make their own way back to an understanding and communication and a deeper
level
than they
were before. Not everybody but some people will realize it six months from now.
ROGERS: I think that when these
initial differences are expressed, when they find that those are understood and
accepted, then it's no longer so necessary to defend them and then they venture
further into deeper feeling. Then they begin to talk about their experiences. I
think of many of the things we've heard recently. I think of that one black
mother who told how she had her child in
a
private school. She'd go to pick up her daughter. The child would take off her
uniform and conceal it in the car and then when she'd go back to the township,
her heart would just be in her throat whenever she saw a group of youth that
perhaps they would stop the car, perhaps they would search it, perhaps they
would be mistreated and abused. It was a terrifying experience for her. Or I
think of another mother who sent her boy to a boarding school in another city
and was very fearful that someday some of the youth would come to her house and
say, "Where's your boy? Why is he in school? Get him out of school. Get
him back here. We want liberation before education. If you don't get him back
here, we'll burn your house." And so she was terrified.
And then there's the fear of
what will be done to them. One father was home in the township when there was a
death in the street next to his, the death of a student. I don't know whether
it was accidental or natural or what. But at any rate a crowd began to gather
and then the police came in and the troops and the children were running for
safety and he opened his house to them and there were children coming in his
house, hiding under the bed. Some other people closed their houses and didn't
want the children in. But for children to be exposed to that kind of thing and
then a 14 year old boy, whom he knew very well came in. He had been trying to come
home, been caught by the situation, was brutally beaten, so, he experienced all
kinds of things and that comes out in the groups.
The pain and hurt of the blacks
and the fear and anger oftentimes on the part of the white and the rates of
bitterness that exists sometimes on both sides is really a part of what we've
experienced.
think whatever my feeling this
time and this is one of the things that I've learned, I never before have come
face-to-face with real caring, warm, intelligent, honest people who ran such
risks as the people I have met since I have come to South Africa this time. 1
cannot conceive what it would mean to put my life on the line when I do take
some action which could ordinarily simply be an everyday act of living. And so
I feel very humble in the face of that. I think I'm a more compassionate
person, a more open to learning person than I was when I came here.
There isn't much that we can do
about that in the external world but one thing that is important in these group
experiences is that the facilitator can grant equality to each member of the
group, equal power, equal trust, equal respect and that comes about simply by
listening with people, care to people of very diverse opinions, skin colors and
so on. It means that for this moment, for this period, all of us are equal here
and that comes out often in astonishing ways. I remember one black man who was
silent for a long time in a group but then spoke up and said, "This is the
first time I've ever said anything to a white person except 'yes, boss, yes,
boss,'" and somehow that really struck home for me and then he went on to
say other things. And on the other side, often whites
have said,
"I have never had the opportunity to speak to a black person as an
equal," and so that's a new experience, to really converse and communicate
with people of another race as equals and that's been a part of our experience.
SANFORD: I think one of the
things that troubles me deeply anywhere that I've felt it, I feel as if everything
is amplified and intensified in the South Africa that I've seen this time - all
the feeling, positive, negative, destructive, constructive, the whole gamut.
But the thing that
troubles me deeply is that I
firmly believe that the essential need of every human being is sometimes,
somewhere in her life/his life to have had a significant person, it doesn't
have to be a parent, hopefully it would be, but a significant person somewhere
along the line who could accept another person, that person, without putting
conditions on it. It's so easy for parents to give the impression, whether they
say it or not, that "I love you when you're good," or "I love
you better when you do as I say." For a teacher to show approval and real
affection and regard for a student who is a good student and gets the right
answers and to leave the other person who is not quite up there, to feel
inadequate, judged unacceptable. So, all through life there is that need and I
feel it's as great a need as the hunger of the body is for food. An individual
denied food cannot grow physically. An individual who has never had the
experience of being deeply and unconditionally accepted by some person
important to him cannot become a whole, healthy, growing human being that he
might otherwise have become. My feeling is that the people who have been denied
that nurturing, that food for the spirit, for the emotions, are very likely to
be the warped people who commit senseless crimes, who do violence to
themselves, to other people. And so I feel when there is a large part of the
population that somehow has been made to feel that they're not as good as other
people, that simply underscores that dilemma and that
problem. I think that's probably the deepest troubled feeling that I have in
this visit this time.
was not
political at all. She was not interested in politics. She had a satisfactory life
and she simply did not want to get mixed up with politics. It did trouble her
that when she drove downtown these days there were many more blacks than there
used to be and sometimes she wished they would just disappear but she felt that
she wanted no part of the discussion of racial issues. Then as some of the
black members of the group brought up their situation and their anger and their
feelings, it brought back to her a memory that she had really forgotten. She
and her mother had lived together in an apartment building with neighbors all
about them and one night her mother died quite suddenly. Naturally this was a
big shock to her and her neighbors in the apartment building expressed their
condolences and "if there's anything I can do, please let me know,"
and "I feel so sorry to hear the news” and "I regret the tragic time
you're going through," and so on but she didn't feel particularly consoled
at all.
And then her cleaning woman came
(a black woman) and within 60 seconds when she heard the news, she was
embracing Jane and comforting her and Jane said that then very shortly other cleaning
people from other parts of the building (she doesn't know how the message got
to them) they came into her apartment. They consoled her, they comforted her,
they massaged her they held a little ritual for the dead, they were'with her in her grief. She had never felt
such
compassion. She couldn't understand why they would be doing this for her. It
was so astonishing because people whom she really knew in the apartment had
been so inept in their attempt to console her and here these people whom she
really didn't know were so compassionate and so much with her in her grief. But
then as the years went by she forgot that and as I say she wished the blacks
would disappear and she just didn't want to get involved. Then the more she
heard of their stories, the more deeply she felt her own prejudices. She
expressed a number of them but one of the most particularly painful to her and
to the black people who heard it, she said, "I wish someone would convince
me that it was not true that the blacks are lower on the scale of evolution…”She
said, "I've been taught that. I've read that. It somehow becomes so
ingrained in me that I feel a deep prejudice about that."
Somehow to hear that coming
from the lips of a white person they felt was friendly to them was quite
shocking to the blacks who were there and it helped to result in some
polarization of the truth. Then as the group went on and got deeper and deeper,
Jane came to realize that her prejudices were being swept away but also she
felt a great deal of remorse for having hurt members of the group, she felt
that some of them were definitely superior to her in compassion
and
capacity for intimacy in some aspects of human relationships and she felt that
she learned a great deal. she also wondered if perhaps
she had really hurt the group by letting them know some of her prejudices.
But we have heard of a lot of
prejudice on both sides and gradually that has been dissolved in the expression
of feeling and the acceptance of feeling. So that's one of the things that has happened in the group.
I'd like to say a little bit
about some of the outcomes that take place in these groups then I will throw it
open to your questions and comments, positive or negative.
We've seen a great many changes
take place and one is that as facilitators have worked with us briefly and
intensively, have gone through a process of change themselves, then they've had
the opportunity to facilitate a small group in the following weekend and have
found it very, very exciting to discover that they themselves can facilitate
the same kind of process through which they've gone as persons and that's been
very fundamental in their learning.
That reminds me. There's one aspect
of the story of Jane that I forgot to mention. She said toward the end of the group
that she felt changes were going on in her that were
deep shifts in geological plates. She was talking about the plates of the
earth's crust and she felt as though some of these
fundamental
aspects of her were just shifting inside so that change goes on internally,
change goes on then in behavior.
I find that people are
interested in getting together in groups of youth, for groups to initiate the
same kind of process in each other's homes, visiting first a home of a white
member of the group, then a home of a black member and so on so that they will
continue their interchange of feelings and attitudes and the possibility of
reconciliation.
completely
accepted and understood her. And then one day, she was telling about a
difference that she had had with this very close friend others, this woman, and
she said she finally told me that we would have to terminate the relationship
and Shaila was devastated because here again she had
failed to maintain an intimate relationship which was very rare for her which
she
had
revealed so much of herself and I misunderstood the reason for her deep grief.
And when I said the thing that showed my misunderstanding, my lack of
understanding after months of being together, she stood up in tears and she
said, "I can't stay! I can't stay!" and rushed toward the door. I put
my arm around her and I said, "Shaila, I
understand you must go now but I'll be
here and I
care very deeply." She went and I realized that I had encountered my own
limitation. I had missed and it had caused her pain. But for some reason I did
not feel guilty about it because I felt I had been there in the best way I
could. The next week when she came back, I gave her the written poem which I
had written. The end of it (I'll not go into it. It's a fairly
long poem) but the end of it
said, "I cannot always go where you would go or stop and stay where you
have been, but I can wait beside the path and be there v/hen you come
again." And the end of it was, "I can but reach my hand across the
chasm of our differences and say with all my heart 'I care.'" But when she
came back next week, she said, "I have been working inside of me all week
and I realize that you couldn't possibly have been in my skin. I expected you
to be
there and
you couldn't possibly be." And then she said a very significant thing,
"I know now that that is why I have not been able to keep intimate
relationships. I put that same kind of expectation on my friends and when they
didn't understand I ran away." So I learned that acknowledging my
limitations and even that kind of close relationship and still being there had
brought Shaila to a turning point in her own understanding of
herself. I think it made me feel very humble and much more ready to accept my
own limitation in my relationships with other people.
almost a miraculous part of therapy or facilitation, that although our understanding is not perfect, it
is still
sufficient to bring about remarkable change. As you say we cannot live in the
skin of
another. I’ve noticed this in working with psychotic individuals and yet even the intent to
understand
is important to the other person. I think I’ll just say one more thing. In one
of the groups
some
dreams were reported that seemed to me that even the dreams had political
significance
and I want to tell one of those dreams.
A man dreamt that he was on a
seesaw. He was on one end of the seesaw and on the other end
was a
rather dark and shadowy figure, at least was balancing the seesaw. The dreamer
had a
gun in
his hand and he decided that he would raise the gun and he might shoot the
other person
Look down!” So he looked down and
underneath him was a bottomless abyss, a pit, and he
realized
if he had pulled the trigger, if he had shot the other figure, he would have
fallen off
and he
himself would have gone into the abyss. He was absolutely terrified of the pit
that was
underneath
him. He realized there was only one solution and that was to try to move closer
together
and so they began to wriggle a little bit at a time and the seesaw was very
precarious
but they
began to get a little bit closer to one another and a little bit closer and a
little bit closer
to
safety. And somehow it seemed to me that was a perfect symbol of the South
African
situation,
that one side could shoot the other but if so it would drop into a bottomless
pit and
that
dream had real meaning for me. It seemed as though the coming closer together,
the
greater degree of communication perhaps represented one of the hopes for this situation.
to stand firmly on the side of hope.
have, we would be glad to hear.
MAN: We in
position
of change. I happen to be of a family that is coincidental with the length of
time of this
country.
We started in 1690, just after
started.
We’ve had a way of living here and we have had that way of living which we’ve
grown
up with and it affects both my country and this university and we are on the point of change but
what we have been through with the so called apartheid that the world throws at us on the other
hand now we have the other side of the fence which is acceptance, to accept others as they are
without the group. We’ve got the group versus freedom of choice of who you’re going to be with
which is
a very big parting of the ways. Now, do you think I was facilitating this
approach of one to
another
that we can talk to, let’s face it with the numbers we have in front of us. We
are
four or
five million against another twenty million. Do you think that by means of talk
we are
going to be able to safeguard the wonderful history of this country of 300
years
and do
you think by talk and understanding that is going to enable us and find a way
of
letting
us go on without throwing the baby of wonderful valued history out with the
bath
water of evolutionary change? Can your talk safeguard them?
groups
were not theoretical. They were real. The people who
came, came of their own
volition
because those people believed in talk, believed that there was hope in
communication.
Let me put it that way or it might be hope. I’d like to respond to your
question
this way. I recognize this is a country of many millions of people. I don’t
come
with a
solution. I think what we have done in the groups we’ve met with is perhaps in
the
nature
of a test tube. It’s on a small scale. To me it shows that communication,
better
understanding
is possible. Now I don’t know whether your society or any society, any
culture
will decide, well then if it’s possible on a small scale, we would like that
kind of
understanding
on a broader scale. If so, I think it would be possible. I think it definitely
possible
to train facilitative people to help them become facilitated but whether your
society
or any culture will decide that’s what they want and have the will to do it, I
don’t
know. I
don’t know but when you ask, is it possible? Yes, I would say it is possible.
Suppose we put that same amount
of time and effort and energy into trying to create
understanding
that we now put into military forces to pull things down. I think the result
would be astonishing. So my answer is yes.
I accept that what you’ve said so
eloquently here is very real for you and I admire and
respect your pride in your country and the history of your country. I have respect and pride in some
parts of the history of my country but not all of it. I think the one condition which determines
whether people of wide differences can come to some kind of understanding is whether they’re
willing to sit down and try it and when they sit down to try it, will they be willing really to listen to
what the other person is saying rather than trying to think of what I want to say next? Those are the
conditions I think in which it could be possible.
MAN: A particular one that I’m
interested is in speaking to the other population groups that you’ve
dealt
with in other parts of the world, how susceptible did you find the South
African
population to your particular approach?
the groups
we have dealt with here, especially this time, have been more eager for communication,
more
eager to find common ground, more ready for change, than any groups I have ever
dealt
with
anywhere. I feel that because this is a critical situation, people are really
searching for
possible
ways of avoiding violence and bringing people together so that I’ve found them
extremely
responsive. When we were here in 1982, we felt there was a real hunger for
communication
but still there were also quite a number of people who were saying, “Things are
really
all right. Just have a little patience. Things are okay.” This time I find
people saying,
“What can I do to bring about change?”
MAN: We have the situation of a
conflict and a conflict doesn’t arise from nowhere and in each
situation
where you deal with a conflict you have to come to an understanding of where
the
conflict
arises from in whatever discussion you are coming to. And I’d like to ask where
you see
conflict
in the situation in
understanding of the causes but I can understand the present conflict and the present
feelings and it has been my experience that in dealing with the present conflict, it is possible to
bring
about a degree of reconciliation even though one doesn’t pretend to fully
understand all
of the causes because I think those are extremely complex.
about it in terms of trying to understand themselves and their part in it. I’ve been much interested in
the preconditions
for change. If we can find a pattern in individuals or in groups, what is it
that
precipitates
a change of attitude, a willingness to look at alternatives in a person or in a
group
when the
group develops a kind of organismic quality of its
own? And the thing which seems
to be
emerging at this point in my examination of that question is a crisis. It’s
usually a crisis.
A person reaches a point in
his/her life which is untenable. A person says,, “I
can’t stand this.
I’ve got to do something about it
even if it’s worse than this but I’ve got to try something.” And
when
that position, a crisis, is reached then usually some real change takes place
and I think a
part of
my feeling right now is that there is a critical situation in
with no
one and my experience has been limited, I know, not truly representative of the
whole
population,
only little samples here and there, but I have yet heard a person who has not
felt
that
in
groups, then it would seem to me that it’s not only a crisis but it’s an
opportunity. It can be a
foreshadowing of some kind of shift or change which perhaps no one at this point can be quite
aware of anymore than an individual can be aware of what will happen when she decides that a
change is essential.
MAN: Dr. Rogers, I would like to
ask you - one of the previous speakers referred to our wonderful
history
in
pessimistic
and I wonder if whether you would be prepared to comment on the weight of the
historical
structures of
you’re
trying to cope with and I’m talking about these historical structures which are
constantly
reinforcing certain attitudes that
changed or
whether individual change was sufficient. I don’t think it’s an either or. I
think that as
individuals
change they tend to change structures or as structures change, they can change
individuals.
That for me was a somewhat new learning in our country. When the civil rights
laws
were passed for example, people in the southern part of our country who had
said, “No
black
will ever enter this university,” all their attitudes changed. They were
changed partly
because
of changes in the law. On the other hand, an example on the opposite side is
that
when we
were in the midst of the Vietnam War it was grass roots public opinion that forced
the
change of policies and structures and behaviors on the part of governmental
leaders. So
that I
think change can come about in either fashion and I think that perhaps we make
a
mistake to separate too sharply individuals and structures.
whole period of the south it was impossible for a black person to do many things; attending a
university
was only one. But in that particular situation Governor Wallace, with a long
tradition
of very strong belief in his position that there had to be absolute separation
in
education
and many other ways and it was not until the Attorney General of the United
States, with Bobby Kennedy and
then later Jack Kennedy, who was the President at that time,
followed
up by putting his own personal weight behind that decision that a black man
should
be
permitted to enroll in a university, so it seems to me that there was on the
one hand a shift
in
legislation but there was also the willingness of some person in a position of
power who
was
willing to stand behind that change. And then Governor Wallace a short time
later said,
“I will put my body in the way. I
will not let this person in.” He was that strong and a short
time
later, he was acknowledging the open door in the university and in many other
parts of
the life
of his fate so it seems to me that what Carl has said is very important. Change
in
structure,
legislation, whatever, is one but it’s also a person with some influence, some
power,
some
acceptance who is willing to put his power, his political position, his
whatever he has to
offer, on the line though its both personal and structural.
MAN: Dr. Rogers, a thing that
worries me deeply about the conflict in
the
crisis which can make us change when we perceive it is perceived by so very few
people
and it
is only those who perhaps live under conditions of oppression or those who live
within
earshot
of the gunfire in townships who, actually could see that crisis and who may be
willing
to come to discussion groups such as you are trying to help us set up here. How
do we get through to the people who haven’t perceived their crisis yet?
question.
I know in one of our groups one of the white members became quite angry and
then the
next day he realized “why was I angry? I was angry because I was being forced
to face
facts which I have tried to avoid for a long, long time.” I feel that there is
no
doubt,
although I haven’t met a large number of those people, that you are correct in
saying
that many people in this country are really unaware of the crisis and I am
sorry to
see the
single voice of radio and television and so on. I deplore the fact that you don’t
have a
more varied press so that your population would really know what is going on. I
sometimes
still feel that perhaps we know more in the
on in
real question
in my mind. It’s very difficult to answer some of these questions when I know
very
well that the people who we are meeting are people who are already somewhat
aware
and I guess I have to say I really don’t know how to reach people who are not
concerned
or not aware of probably their own deeper feelings and I guess that’s
something
that people in
WOMAN: Dr. Rogers and is it Mrs. Sanford? I have a
problem. We live in
facilitative groups and working in an environment where there is empathy and understanding is not
what I need now and my feelings has been with that especially white people have used your therapy
to tell me that they [hear] me and understand me and they damn well not going to do anything else
about it. They’ve created most of my environment for me. I’ve been discriminated against from
birth and the person in all spheres, education, politics, economics. Now I must speak on an equal
level. It’s unrealistic. I’m very pessimistic about it, especially when I speak to the young people in
high
school. They’ve gone way beyond negotiation or any attempts to understand or
want to be
involved
with. Apartheid and group areas has been very successful.
I’m not sure that
within my lifetime we are going to eradicate any of this. Thank you.
channels
by which you can speak to the people to whom you want to speak? After being
silent for
so long,
is it possible to speak up immediately and take those positions in places which
you feel matter?
right. I
just know that as Ruth said earlier, my efforts are going to be on the side of
hope but I
am well
aware, certainly not completely aware, but well aware of the many, many
complexities
in this situation of how far it has gone in many ways, yet I’ll express the
voice
of hope.
On the other side of the coin that you represent and I really feel very deeply
for
the
group that you’re speaking for. On the other side of that is the possibility
here, this is a
highly
diversified society, if by any miracle, you are able to make it to a democratic
kind of
understanding
of one another and where people really can participate in their own future
and in
decision making, it’ll be an incredible achievement and an incredible lesson to
the
world.
You have a much more pluralistic society than my own in my country and we have
our own
difficulties and I really do recognize some of the incredible complexities
here.
Yet, the amount of goodwill here
is also tremendous. That keeps impressing me. People
who have
been oppressed, who have every reason to be angry. That’s one thing about
Jane, the white woman I was
talking about. She said, “If I had been oppressed the way
you
have, I would be much more angry and much more violent than you people have
been.”
Another man said that as he runs around the block and meets a lot of the blacks
going to
work the refrain that goes through his mind is, “Thank God they are a forgiving
race.”
And at any rate, what I want to say is that there is enormous reservoir of
goodwill in
various
races and classifications and so on and perhaps that can win out but I know it’s
a
slim
chance and that’s one reason why it’s such an incredible time to be here
because I feel
the country is teetering on the brink and it may make it and it may not.
for a group and some neighborhoods but I heard you speaking for yourself and I want to say to you
that I
have just seen you take one of those steps in making yourself as a part of that
group heard
and I have respect and admiration for your standing up and saying it.
MAN: Having been in this country for ten generations, I would like to address this gentleman. I
would like to say I understand his fears having grown up in that environment. I also want to
mention that since my work for many years has been exactly that of promoting communication
between conflicting groups, I’ve come to learn through communication that I’m closer to many
people if I may use them to refer to, people from the larger numbers, Mangosuthu Butalezi, Winnie
Mandela, Nelson Mandela. I’ve learned that I’m closer to them than to many people who are
supposed to be close to me because of the color of their skin. I’ve also learned that I can trust in
these people more to protect those things of value for me which for me is not my white skin or
white heritage. I also would like to mention this process of communication I highly commend. I
share the concerns, and apprehension of those who feel that it is too late. I do not believe it can ever
be too late. I do not believe that communication, the kind of thing with which we are concerned
here in this course is an alternative for other measures. I see it is complimentary to whatever other
actions we
take to promote a better society. What I’ve found is that communication is the
essential
process
to bring an end to conflict and if I put it in simple terms, every war comes to
an end
through
communication. So, therefore, it’s never too late. The more the violence, the
more the
oppression,
the more the need for communication to assist in the process of bringing that
violence
to an end with a minimum or a reduction of violence. So, therefore, if I may
speak
from my
learned experience and from what I’ve learned from people like Carl Rogers, we
can
never
have enough of this exercise and this training if we want to build a better
society.
MAN: Dr. Rogers, I wonder if I could make a comment. I’m sad to say that I think we’ve missed
the boat
entirely tonight. The issue was raised earlier as to whether changes initiated
from an
individual
basis or whether it comes from a more structural basis, be it legislation or
organizational
or institutional change. And the ingredient that was missing which was pointed
by Dr.
Sanford was certainly one of power. The issue is much more I think where the
power
base
lies far more than small, interpersonal negotiations. The example quoted from
the United
States was when the President
himself actually had the power to back new legislation and if the
power
doesn’t lie in the hands of the people wishing to encourage change then where
does our
resort
lie? If the African National Congress remain a banned party, detention without
trial
exists
and other repressive legislation in this country. The question is surely a question
of
where
the power base lies far more than small negotiations where we hope to find out
how the
other person feels if we don’t have that power to actually change anything.
communication
requires that both people who are facing difference need to be willing to sit
down and listen and if that doesn’t exist, your true there’s a block there.
You may recall that the Vietnam
War in the
grass roots
protest. It was not that someone in power was opposed to it, it was that there
was an
enormous
tidal wave of grass roots protest and it seems to me that’s possible in this
country as
well. It is something that is very hard to disregard.
MAN: Could I briefly respond? I
was a little depressed that all of the intergroup
negotiations we
discussed
tonight were on a racial basis or on a group basis. Nobody seems to have
explained
the idea
that perhaps the war in
situation
is not quite applicable here because in
world,
who owned the means of economic production and hence can be summarized as the
haves.
And the have-nots do not have the
power and so that analogy of the Vietnam War is not
applicable
here because how do we know that those who are in the elite class economically
and
politically speaking are prepared to negotiate with the majority class that do not possess the
economic
elementary power?
actually willing to negotiate will be tested by time. That’s why I have some skepticism as you did
but I feel that if the President’s message is truly meant and implemented then that might help to
bring about the exchange of views which really might result in a differential use of power.
that if
a person, and this was the President of the
as it was,
then it was important that they listen. I don’t know whether that’s applicable
here or not
but I
think that was the point that I got from the groundswell of communication, from
people
from all
groups in the
WOMAN: Dr. Rogers there was something I, well, two issues that I see to highlight and the one is
prejudice, many times when I’ve been in the States and got into conversations and discussions there
has been
the example of what has happened in the
think it’s a comparable situation. I have a sense that what creates a stalemate in this country is fear
and it’s the fear of identity and To pick up perhaps on the first speaker question of numbers is that
there is a fear that the white identity and that’s split into many cautions but just taking it as one
more whole would be entirely lost. So it’s not only a prejudice, it’s that if I get through the
prejudice, I who I am and what I feel myself to be deeply will be lost. I have a sense of compassion
for people who are trying to also protect that and there should be a right for both sides and I’d
really like to hear what you have to say on that.
attitude
toward
some of
the complexities, they would more patient, more understanding. I feel that this
is not a
simple problem.
There is no simple solution and I regret that many people outside of this
country
simply take a black and white (excuse the pun), simply take a judgmental stand without any
consideration
for the complexities. As the other, there certainly is much to be said on both
sides. I
think that I would just say that the longer the struggle goes on, the more risk
there is
that the
whites would lose all. If they can only negotiate now, then I think there is
real hope
that
they would definitely preserve their identity but if the struggle goes on too
long, that might
not be the case. That will be my comment.
MAN: Dr. Rogers, deep down I
believe that
would
look not as white and as black but as people, but unfortunately as many members
of the
community
which I come from believe, that because a white racist regime has existed for
such a
long
time, it means that the majority of white people have defined themselves as
part of the
problem
but we can overcome that problem as was mentioned, I think by
Dr. van der Merwe. It is communication. But what of communication? Deep down I think that as
human
beings we have enough life and love in
us, the type of love which is the supreme unifying
principle of life and then to develop that type of unity has got to be free from any prejudice, mistrust or suspicion. Now how to nurture that?
From my own experience, what I
try to do is that I acknowledge the fact that I can’t change the
world
but if I can attempt to train my own world, my own thinking, I think that is a
starting
point.
So that the youth in terms of education as mentioned by the speaker on the
left, if we
give
them all the hope, rather than despair and darkness, we will slowly move in the
right direction.
Thank you.
that
what hope there is in a situation like this lies in communication, and
violence,
no matter how seemingly sensible it is, must end in communication, must end in
dialogue
and the hope of the situation is that perhaps that dialogue can be sooner
rather than
later
and that’s why I find this a terribly significant moment in South African
history and I
hope
with all my heart that there can be a coming together which will avoid the explosion
that
a lot of
people fear.