From antagonism to agonism in identity-based conflict: an analysis of the bridging the religious divide dialogue project in Salt Lake City

An increasing number of conflicts in the world today are driven - at least in part - by the disputants' identification with worldviews or moral orders that are incommensurate. Many of these conflicts are exacerbated by disputants' further identification with unmourned trauma, trauma that has compelled disputants to "turn away" from or "foreclose" the other. Arguing that traditional conflict resolution strategies often fail to help - or may even exacerbate - these conflict situations, this paper seeks to answer the question: How can discourse be imagined, structured and practiced so that it: (1) fosters agonistic rather than antagonistic relationships between individuals and groups who identify with divergent worldviews; and (2) encourages isputants to move beyond identification with past trauma and unfold the "foreclosure" of others they feel have harmed them. Based on the analysis of a dialogue project described by many participants as transformative, this paper suggests four discursive strategies: interactive approach, dialogic structure, affective ambiance, and narrative focus. This paper first describes a divisive dispute in Salt Lake City, Utah, that emerged in response to the city's decision to sell a block of Main Street to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. After analyzing the religious divide between Mormon and non-Mormon residents of the city that underlies that dispute, it then analyzes two public processes initiated to address the conflict.