In a conflict, we tend to see the other side as simply wrong — positioned at the opposite end of the spectrum from us. This happens over and over, cycle after cycle, until the positions become entrenched. Both sides get locked into what I think of as a "move-oppose" dynamic: whatever the other proposes, the instinct is to resist it, not because the idea itself is flawed, but because of who said it.

There's a way to shift this. It begins with actually seeing the validity in the other side's proposal — even partially — rather than opposing it simply because it came from "them."

When I understand the validity of what's being proposed, even in part, something shifts. The dynamic moves from "move-oppose" to "move-follow." Because one side has been genuinely heard, they become willing to hear the other in return. That first break in the cycle happens when someone holding space for the conflict has truly heard one side — and in being heard, they open up to seeing another perspective too.

De-escalation needs a safe space to happen in. That space opens up when someone takes a helicopter view of the situation — standing outside the conflict rather than inside it — and from there, is able to point to genuine ways forward, real possibilities for collaboration that neither side could see while they were still locked in opposition.