Tears and cheers

On Tuesday night, the contrast between sorrowful tears and exultant cheers created a harrowing scene. Even more disturbing was that these emotional reactions fed off each other with each intensifying the other. The giddiness of Trump supporters isn’t simply rooted in the victory of their candidate, but also (and perhaps to a greater extent) in the distress of their political opponents. On Facebook, one of my friends wrote unabashedly of the schadenfreude he felt at the sight of liberals “tearing out their hair.”

The poor manner in which liberals are handling the loss of their candidate makes me doubt that they would have been any more gracious or conciliatory in victory. Most of them—forgetting Michelle Obama’s call that “when they go low, we go high”—make unconstructive, inflammatory remarks on the bigotry and unintelligence of their fellow citizens. Late on election night, a public policy professor approached some of my Trump-supporting friends at the Bull Durham Bar to tell them that he didn’t understand how they were admitted to this school.

There is a deepening division in American society. However, what truly frightens me is the rising political animosity. Pew Research opinion polls show an increase of partisan antipathy over time. The percentage of people who hold “very unfavorable” attitudes towards the opposite political party has tripled from 1994 to now. While the percentage of parents who disapprove of their child marrying someone of a different race or religion has gone down over time, the opposite trend holds for parents who disapprove of their child marrying someone of the opposite political party.

In a recent piece in The Chronicle, one student wrote that a majority of the country deemed him “less than human” on Tuesday night. His article conveyed the disgust he felt that half of the country voted for someone he considers a despicable person. This revulsion is shared by millions on both sides. Jonathan Haidt, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, points out that the prevalence of this feeling is worrisome because “disgust dehumanizes its targets [which] is why it is usually fostered by the perpetrators of genocide—disgust makes it easier for ordinary citizens to kill their neighbors.” This is how we end up at a point where one citizen’s anguish causes another’s delight. How can we move past this vile situation?

In many ways, all sides need to show greater empathy. Those who voted for Donald Trump must recognize that the fear and anger of minorities across the country is legitimate. The President-elect ran a campaign littered with discriminatory comments and promises. Since the election, many hateful acts perpetrated by his supporters make it clear that bigotry was not a non-factor in this race as some have claimed. However, blanket statements that all Trump’s supporters are some combination of racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic and transphobic are wrong. These comments delegitimize the very real struggles that drove many to vote for the man who will be sworn into office on Jan. 20. They also feed the feelings of alienation and disaffection that provided another impetus to vote for Trump. Indeed, Jason Willick notes the symbiotic relationship between the militant PC left and the alt-right that helped elect the Republican nominee.

How can people become more empathetic towards those on the opposite side of the political spectrum? One solution, Haidt, a leader in the field of moral psychology, tells us, is greater proximity. Indeed, Americans interact less and less (both in the real and the virtual world) with those who hold different political views than them. Urban populations are becoming overwhelmingly liberal while rural areas are much more conservative. Institutions where people of different political convictions could come together such as churches and universities are moving towards political homogeneity. Social media newsfeeds are echo chambers. The average liberal individual will go onto Facebook to read posts about the oppression of minorities and the privilege of white straight males, while his or her conservative counterpart will enjoy a catalogue of reasons President Obama should be impeached.

Greater proximity will allow people to become more familiar with others and with their fears, frustrations and insecurities. Overtime, familiarity can transform into empathy and even love, the most powerful check on the human inclination towards tribalism. So to all those who have sought to end their relationships with those who voted for the “wrong candidate,” why don’t you begin a conversation instead?

Julian Keeley is a Trinity senior. His column, "individuals and institutions," runs on alternate Fridays.