Trampling on …

Here is a tragic, suicidal expression of unfulfilled needs on a very intense subject.

“trampling on something”

So Gorbatchov wants people not to trample on something, but what is his positive wish then ?

Some options:
= Please treat something with care
= Please treat something with respect
= Please act in a constructive way

The rights of citizens

The rights of citizens refers to specific, concrete things – such as for example the right to voice an opinion (and be heard with it) without fear of negative consequences from the authorities that hold powers to regulate the way people live together in a state. A body of law and practices – all of these are particular strategies.

So, what could be the needs, the precious values he wants to see treated with respect and care behind those strategies?

I am guessing this framework of rights for citizens is there to help people lead a free and happy life, both in community and individual life in all ways, shapes and manners. Freedom – mutual respect – taking of responsibility by choice – inclusiveness – justice – all of these and perhaps more – may be in play behind the strategy “Rights of Citicens”.

Making life more wonderful in the true sense. Have freedom of movement, freedom of speech, all with respect for others – something that would be shown by mutual honesty and understanding – and giving all people an opportunity to be heard and understood in what the community, the state will decide to do or not to do.

So, it so important to him as a person, to treat the tool to help a happy life in society become a reality to be treated with respect and care.

“It is all”

Translate impersonal expressions to personal, unconcrete to specific
= many decisions by the current Russian goverment.

The word “it” makes unclear who is the acting instance in this situation and thereby makes it less likely that the speaker is being heard in his true meaning. On the other hand, the strategy of impersonalization may seem to offer some protection to the speaker, avoiding being heard as directly blaming an authority (such as in this case – Putin and his government practices).

Giraffes prefer to refer to a specific observation, that may be more connecting by creating a shared sense of reality. What was the actual trigger for Gorbachov, so that he came to this conclusion of citzen rights being trampled on?

A giraffe might therefore hear Gorbachov say:

“I would like to see the government treat the rights of citizens with great care, to leave people free, to provide transparency and reliability.”

As connecting strategy in dialogue many options – I personally would like to go directly to guess what the actual observations were, such as “Are you refering to the passing of the law against ‘foreign agents’, which is leading to mute many helpful voices in society?” Finding out which specifics are on the mind of the speaker helps me to get a better sense of what the needs might be for the speaker.

In my experience it supports the flow of the dialogue towards a greater shared sense of meaning.

In the end you might arrive at a moment where an empathy guess might resonate and create deep connection with life, felt in the body.

“Is it the joy of seeing a society of happy people, living peacefully together that deeply motivates you?”