The Importance of Staying Calm and Curious When Discussing Politics Rather Than Getting Angry.

Once, politics was a place where politicians could engage in civil discussions with respect. However, now in political debates and conversations we see nothing but anger and attack rather than focusing on policy and positive change-making. Not only has this shift occurred among politicians themselves, but an inability to accept different points of views has permeated American society. The root of this shift and how to remedy it is something that we are all still grappling with. This piece is simply my own personal take on this problem, and is based on my own personal observations and experience with engaging in political conversation.

In order to remedy this situation we must first understand the root of the problem: we have placed too much value on parties and politicians rather than their principles and policies. What is a reason for this happening? People like to feel like they are part of a group, it can give them a sense of purpose and identity. Political spaces and beliefs can form a sense of community and unity. However, because of this, when we have political conversations with a individual from an opposing party, things can get heated because it can feel like that person is attacking your identity and invalidating your emotions. This makes it very difficult to find common ground, accept our differences, and approach conversations with curiosity because all of the deep emotions that are involved.

However, having calm conversations with individuals who have different views than you is crucial: it upholds and benefits democracy. Without having conversations the hatred and misconceptions about the “other side” remains, perpetuating violence and division between citizens. However, when we engage in conversation we can gain a greater understanding of the “why” behind an individual's decision to support a given party or candidate. The goal of political conversations should not be to convince another individual to have your views, but to understand the factors and influences that make them think a certain way. In Talking to Strangers: Anxieties of Citizenship since Brown v. Board of Education, Danielle Allen states that in an ideal democracy people do not only fight for what they believe in, but they seek to understand their fellow citizens' concerns. Creating a democratic society which is unified and supports every individual is not possible without understanding and becoming exposed to other people’s backgrounds and beliefs. 

So how exactly can we engage in conversations about politics that don't ignite anger? Curiosity. If we approach conversations with a sense of genuine interest, others will feel comfortable to explain their differing beliefs more calmly. From my own experiences I have learned that demonstrating curiosity affirms the individual or individuals you are speaking with that you are not intending to attack their identity or invalidate their emotions. When I have conversations with individuals during my internship, I try to approach others who think differently than me by saying "I don't see eye-to-eye with you on your beliefs, but I'd love to understand how you generated your opinions" rather than saying "How can you possibly believe that?"

As the conversation progresses and I start to gain a greater understanding of the other person’s beliefs I could ask something along the lines of: If you say you believe this, then why did you vote like that? This question reflects a deep curiosity about why a individual may make a certain political decision rather than attacking them with phrases like "you are brainwashed" or "you are wrong." Finally, If possible I always like to center on areas where I can find a common ground with a individual and acknowledge the fact that while we have differing beliefs we are more similar than we think. However, sometimes I have learned that there may be no overlap in our viewpoints and that is okay! Even still, I think it is important to acknowledge and accept the conversation's conclusion.