I’ve spent a year refusing to let polarization be the whole story.

And strangely enough, Marjorie Taylor Greene became the example that clarified why.

She’s not someone I ever expected to reflect on at year’s end.

And I’m not here to argue that she’s undergone a full transformation, nor that accountability should be suspended.

But her very public shift revealed something more profound about the rest of us:

We create almost no space for people to change their minds.

And when someone does, even imperfectly…we punish it.

The Year I Studied Division… and Us

This year, I found myself wrestling with one hard truth, our shrinking capacity to hold space for one another’s evolution.

We talk about wanting connection, nuance, and healing.

Yet we live in a culture that treats certainty as virtue and change as betrayal.

My work with leaders and teams has always centered on a simple truth:

Curiosity is what makes connection possible.

And research supports what I see every day:

People high in science curiosity actively seek out information that contradicts their beliefs, and they become less polarized as a result. This comes from Dan Kahan’s foundational study on science curiosity and political information processing (Kahan, Landrum, Carpenter, Helft & Jamieson, 2017), later reinforced by summaries from Yale and the Annenberg Public Policy Center showing that curiosity can offset political bias.

Studies on political curiosity show something equally powerful: when people believe their own group is open to updating views, their curiosity increases. A 2025 multi-study paper in Scientific Reports found that recalibrating perceived ingroup norms, simply showing people that their peers value open-mindedness, makes them less defensive and more willing to engage across difference.

Curiosity interrupts our echo chambers.

I’ve been told more than once that my perspective is aspirational.

I don’t disagree.

In coaching, aspiration is the starting line. It’s the moment someone says, “Something needs to shift.” But real behavior change only happens when that aspiration meets deliberate action, and when we allow ourselves, and each other, the humanity to grow through the process.

So yes, I’m aspirational.

Because every transformation I’ve ever witnessed began with someone daring to imagine something better.

Why Public Change Feels Dangerous

Privately changing your mind can feel liberating.

Doing it publicly is something else entirely.

Political scientists call this political conformity:

Groups reward loyalty and shame deviation.

Changing a stance becomes not just an intellectual shift, but also a social and moral hazard.

Add the reality of public discourse:

Research on disagreement online is unequivocal. Baughan et al. (2022) found that shaming language increases defensiveness and reduces the likelihood of belief updating. Shame doesn’t open people. Shame shuts them down.

So intentionally or not, we’ve built a culture that:

• Rewards stubbornness
• Punishes evolution
• Treats inconsistency as weakness

Is it any wonder so few people ever change publicly?

Or that when someone does (like MTG), they’re attacked from all sides?

MTG as a Real-Time Case Study

This year, MTG broke with Trump on several issues: foreign policy, the Epstein records, and more. Eventually, she resigned from Congress.

Even if many of her core stances remain, the shift itself was unthinkable just a few years ago.

The public response was predictable:

• Her conservative base called her a traitor.
• Moderates and liberals said, “Too little, too late.”
• And very few asked the question that actually matters:

What conditions make it safe, or impossible, for someone to evolve in public?

This isn’t about liking or disliking MTG.

This is about how reflexively we reject complexity; in others and, if we’re honest, in ourselves.

What Actually Enables People to Change Their Minds

Across studies, we see the same pattern when people genuinely change their minds.

First, something interrupts the story they’ve been holding. It might be new information, a personal experience, or a moment that makes them pause and think, “Maybe this isn’t the whole picture.”

Second, there has to be a bridge to someone on the other side. We change more easily when we’re in conversation with people who treat us with respect. Even imperfect contact matters.

My own TEDx talk started with a single curious question across a political divide, and that moment shifted everything. It opened a door.

Third, we need a new story that actually makes sense to us. This is where humility comes in. When people can acknowledge, “I might not have it all figured out,” they become more open to evolving.

But humility can’t survive in a culture that punishes change.

People can grow. But only when we make growth something that’s allowed, supported, and normalized. And right now, we don’t do that very well.

My Reflection on the Year: We Must Make Room for Transformation

Not every shift is sincere, and accountability still stands. But refusing people the space to evolve only fuels the polarization we fear. In the spirit of holding multiple truths at once, we can honor accountability while still making room for growth.

Aspiration may spark change, but grace sustains it. Grace doesn’t dismiss consequences; it creates possibilities.

Our collective healing may just begin with us being able to say

“I’m aware of my own shifts, and I’m open to the shifts I see in others.”