In the book Count Lucanor, it is narrated that a badly injured and disfigured crow asked the owls for help and, despite a long war between the owls and the crows, the latter took the injured crow in and protected it. Days passed and the crow’s feathers settled, a new and stronger one appeared – during this time – the crow gained the trust of the owls and proposed to be their spokesman and mediator in ending the differences between the birds. Indeed, the crow flew to his home group and reported the life of the owls. The next day, the crows attacked the owls while they were sleeping.

From a pessimistic perspective, we can read that anecdote as the impossibility of providing shelter to the enemy, much less believing in him. However, there are new aspects to consider. First, is it possible to reconcile completely different positions? Second, to what extent should we trust those who clearly belong to another group? Third, is the best interlocutor someone who used to be a detractor?

As for the first, “reconcile positions”. Although the desire to win the competition exists, this does not mean that the possibility of dialogue with the opponent is denied or that the factions end up completely agreeing; But practicing dialogue allows us to identify fields for joint action, which are suitable for both parties. But this dialogue requires a mediator to help guide the analysis and appeal to agreements based on tangible goals.

As for the second, “trust.” Trust is fundamental, but our societies are fractured by suspicion, repeated acts of corruption, and because the promises made seem to have less and less value every day. The scientific literature suggests that building trust requires respectful dialogue. Another suggestion is to choose the sources to be used to show the magnitude of the problem. Reliable and verifiable sources become unifying elements because, if they are true, they can serve to establish positions and concentrate efforts on solutions.

(…) Although diversity in the group is healthy, it is important to know to whom the door opens.

As for the old detractors. Inviting someone who is clearly a detractor to the table is a demoralizing action and results in a loss of motivation for a group of close associates. Culprits – who opportunistically become followers – are a danger because they create tensions and fragments within any organization, weakening the solid foundations on which organizations are built.

So, although diversity in the group is healthy, it is important to know who the door is open to. Because although the crow – saved by the owls – was certainly grateful to its rescuers, it is still responsible for the sudden attack and murder of the unsuspecting owls.

Fortunately, you can always start over, part the waters, warn your intentions and watch your back. Let’s hope that the politicians – who currently occupy the governments – will know how to recognize and strengthen their ranks of collaborators, because many crows are waiting for the opportunity to dig out their eyes. (OR)