Elon Musk often disparages his political opponents, and he uses his social media sites to call people out on this. Idiot and Idiot,They are”Mind Virus” and other people’s MaliceHe also despises people outside of political contexts ( The word “pedophile”.
Musk’s contemptuous behavior not only amplifies the toxicity of our divisions, it is also self-defeating, because it strengthens and infuriates his more extreme and passionate opponents (just as their contempt gives them more power).
Criticism of Musk (and people like him) is often mistakenly trivialized as criticism of their beliefs. But this criticism of Musk is not criticism of his beliefs, but rather criticism of how he deals with disagreement and conflict. It is criticism not of the polarization of his beliefs, but of the polarization of his feelings, his contempt for “the other side.”
Imagine Elon Musk believing much the same things, but understanding the humanity of the other person and the better motivations for their beliefs, and also thinking they are wrong. That version of Musk could work for his beliefs, but do so without amplifying hostility and toxicity.
I actually agree with Musk in part. I think some of the ideas of the far left are harmful and divisive, and I think Democrats Denying Republicans’ Reasonable Concerns I believe how I engage on immigration and other issues is crucial, regardless of my political beliefs.
Americans will always have strong differences. How we engage is within our control. When we act in ways that increase conflict, we strengthen the most divisive and extreme people and ideas, helping to create a toxic, chaotic, and unstable society from which everyone loses.
I’ve focused on Musk here, but I could also talk about divisive figures on the left, like Keith Olbermann, who has long been Derogatory and Amplifying conflict He acted in such a way that he would be upset to hear such things from a Republican about his political opponent.
One way to understand how political toxicity grows is to imagine Olbermann and Musk yelling at each other in a room, their mutual contempt and anger feeding off each other’s, until their beliefs become increasingly extreme and uncompromising. Toxic conflict is a feedback cycle, a hurricane system driven by human emotions.
The truth is, humans are simply bad at understanding the dynamics of conflict. We have a hard time talking about what makes a person conflict-inducing and fail to see such traits as separate from the realm of beliefs. This is why we often get caught in conflict spirals. Our instincts about how to act in conflict are unhelpful and can make things worse.
When we confuse and conflate people’s beliefs with their level of hostility, we are unable to offer persuasive criticism of their unhealthy and harmful interactions. Even our most well-intentioned and constructive criticisms are often misinterpreted as criticism of beliefs.
An important place to criticize these practices is within our own political platforms, because criticism of “the other side” is largely ignored and discredited by them. Our own political groups are the main place where we can actually work to reduce harmful approaches.
And criticizing one’s “partners” may, counterintuitively, reduce hostility on the “other side.” 2014 Survey We found that people felt less anger when they saw the “other side” arguing and disagreeing. Our instincts make us feel like criticizing our own group will help our opponents, but in fact it can help reduce conflict and achieve compromise.
To reduce conflict, we need more people to stand up to harmful and divisive ideas and actions within their own political circles. We need more people to say, “I agree with your position, but what you say is inaccurate and insulting, and it exacerbates our divisions.” A deeper understanding of the dynamics of conflict can help people do this.
Beliefs and engagement are different dimensions, but in the real world, the world of real people, they are inextricably linked. Unjustified hatred Fear changes people’s beliefs and makes them more extreme and irrational. For example, Olbermann’s extreme contempt leads him to believe that the Supreme Court should be dissolved. Similarly, strong hostility and fear Growing distrust in elections.
If we want to reduce toxic and derogatory politics, we need to think about the conflict-increasing actions of Elon Musk and many others in our polarized society. We need to see our divisions not simply as political or cultural disagreements, but as conflicts between those who want to increase hostility and those who want to decrease it.
More people need to think about the polarizing behavior in their own political groups and ask themselves: Are these approaches creating a more harmful, chaotic, and unstable future? Would I support these approaches if my political opponents did the same thing? Do I really want to support people who behave in this way? Do these approaches actually amplify extremism? Is pursuing political goals in a way that is less polarizing and angry actually a better way to support extremism? Please help me achieve my goal?
Zachary Elwood He is the author of Defusing American Anger and the host of the psychology podcast People Who Read People.
