Recent studies suggest that many professionals, including myself, have noted a troubling trend: young liberals tend to experience worse mental health compared to their conservative counterparts. Statistician Nate Silver recently highlighted this issue in his analysis. While numerous factors contribute to this disparity, one explanation seems under-discussed in the broader national dialogue.
As a clinical psychologist, I’ve observed this pattern among my clients firsthand. Some express feelings of anxiety, loneliness, and disconnection, but initially, they don’t attribute these feelings to political issues. It’s only after some reflection that they realize they’ve distanced themselves from family members, ended friendships, or stepped back from romantic relationships.
While working on future writing projects, I found a consistent theme, which I’ve termed “Five DS”: defiling, declining, distancing, dropping, and disagreeing based on political views. These actions often stem from strongly held moral beliefs but can ultimately damage the relationships we rely on for emotional support. Research indicates that liberals are statistically more likely to engage in these behaviors than conservatives.
The reality of the situation is stark. The U.S. Surgeon General has labeled loneliness a public health crisis, citing its connection to issues like depression, anxiety, and even physical health problems. Strong social connections serve as a vital buffer against stress and help people feel more grounded and connected.
As social beings, we rely on our relationships to manage stress. When politics seep into these bonds, especially through the habitual application of the Five DS, it may lead some liberals to isolate themselves, which could heighten feelings of loneliness and difficulty in emotional regulation.
Some individuals justify these actions as a protective measure, viewing opposing viewpoints as threats. However, this mindset can be harmful. The risk of conflict may weaken mental health and impede social interactions. A recent essay in the New York Times posed a question: “Is it time to stop snubbing right-wing family members?” Former Obama speechwriter David Litt has contemplated whether to reach out to his conservative brother-in-law. While he expresses an openness to reconnect, his hesitation is evident.
This concern about maintaining relationships with family has become increasingly common in national discourse. It was once seen as extreme to sever ties with loved ones over political differences, but now it seems almost normalized.
Viewing dissent as disallowed or threatening is prevalent. The phrase “words are violence” may resonate with many, but it fosters anxiety and isolation. When we regard different views as threats, we inadvertently push people away, not out of necessity, but because we’ve convinced ourselves it’s the right choice. The result? A profound sense of loneliness and vulnerability.
That’s not to say all relationships need saving—setting boundaries is crucial. However, routinely resorting to ideological cutoffs is a different matter altogether, one that can be damaging. Interestingly, while conservatives may exhibit emotional rigidity, they are less likely to sever ties over political differences, which can protect their emotional well-being during divisive times.
As a psychologist, I believe that political beliefs shouldn’t dictate our relationships. However, the habits we form around our connections can significantly impact mental health. Cutting ties with those close to us, even amidst serious disagreements, removes essential buffers for emotional distress. Often, we do this under the mistaken belief that it upholds our integrity.
The key isn’t to sidestep politics altogether. It’s about cultivating a mindset that recognizes disagreement as non-threatening. Discomfort doesn’t have to lead to toxicity; we can learn to discuss our differences, even when they are challenging.
Mental health and freedom of speech are intertwined in ways that many don’t fully appreciate. If your goal is to feel less anxious, less isolated, and more connected, it’s crucial to reconsider the costs of maintaining ideological purity. While the Five DS may offer a sense of righteousness in the short term, the long-term impact on our mental health may prove too detrimental.
