When we avoid or try to tamp down disagreement about something important, we risk it becoming like a snake under the rug.
Once upon a time, a rug merchant noticed that his most precious antique rug had a large bump in the center. He stepped on the bump to flatten it out—and succeeded. But the bump reappeared in a new spot not far away. He jumped on the bump, and it disappeared for a moment, then emerged once more in a new place. Again and again, he jumped, scuffing and mangling the fragile rug in his frustration. Finally, an assistant lifted one corner of the rug, and an angry snake slithered out.
I first ran across this story years ago in a book by famed systems thinker Peter Senge. I’ve told the story to hundreds of audiences over the years, and there are always many nods of rueful recognition. We’ve seen a snake or two under our own rugs.
Disagreement can become one of those snakes. We figuratively step on the disagreement when we avoid or smooth over dissent. Yet when a matter is important to the dissenter — for whatever reason, whether we value their reason or not — it doesn’t simply dissolve. Like the snake, it moves to a different place.
The new place may be literal, such as the matter coming up next in the committee meeting room. The new place may be figurative, as when the matter keeps showing up in other conversations or as a weapon when bickering, or when the smoothed-over issue becomes the source of intense frustration and anger.
Of course, not every little disagreement deserves time and attention.
We don’t need to accept every invitation to an argument.
It’s the important ones that grow into snakes if left unattended. Important to us, or important to them. Even when we don’t care, if they do, it will keep moving around under the rug.
How do we know which are the important ones?