By Sandy Glanfield

Listening to Tsitsi Chirikure made me think about the quiet power we hold through our words. Language has the capacity to welcome people in, or to belittle, separate and close the conversation. Sometimes softly, sometimes quite sharply.

Tsitsi’s work explores society’s relationship with so-called invasive species. In her work with Himalayan Balsam, she has noticed how the language used to describe certain plants in the UK feels very similar to the language that is often used about people with an immigration background. Language that suggests someone or something does not belong.

This made me reflect on the way we have been exploring naivety on the podcast. We have heard again and again that being called naïve is often a way of shutting someone down. It can sound like: This is how the world is. Thinking otherwise is foolish. There is no other option.

It feels very similar to what Tsitsi describes. Both can be used to decide who is allowed to take part in a conversation and who is not.

Tsitsi also spoke about moments when experts pushed her thinking aside. Instead of being curious about the connection she noticed between invasive plants and immigration, she was discouraged from sharing it. Yet this comparison offers a useful way to see how our social and ecological worlds are linked.

It made me wonder: who do we exclude when we assume only certain kinds of thinking are acceptable?

Often, people who imagine a different way of living find themselves outside the discussion. We are encouraged to believe that our economic structures are unchangeable. We are taught that growth must always be tied to consumption. We do not often learn about alternative systems, like circular economies or other models of shared value. So when someone senses that life could be arranged differently, there are not many places to take that curiosity.

This is why Tsitsi’s work feels so refreshing. She uses metaphor as a doorway. Through metaphor and story, she helps us explore ideas that might otherwise feel too unfamiliar. This makes it easier to understand each other. Perhaps it even helps us feel more connected to the living world around us.

When we use language to shut people down, we lose some of the creativity and imagination we need. We limit our ability to respond to the challenges we face. We also limit who feels welcome to contribute. But when we listen with curiosity, we open space for new ways of thinking. It might be that the people who can imagine alternatives are not the naïve ones at all. They may be the ones helping us see what is possible.

This links, for me, to the Golden Rule: treat others and the planet as you wish to be treated.

If I want to be met with curiosity rather than judgment

If I want to be invited in rather than shut out

If I want to belong even when I think differently

Then I need to offer that same care to others.

It means choosing language that recognises the dignity of people and places.

It means approaching conversation with openness.

It means creating spaces where imagination is welcome and encouraged.

When we speak with care, we change how we relate to one another. We also begin to open the possibility of a different kind of future.