All good psychological theories start like this: "There are two kinds of people in the world..."
I'm joking about that, but a lot of psychological descriptions do start with noticing contrasts in the world, like the difference between introverts and extroverts.
I've noticed something about myself that contrasts with what I've observed in others. The issue concerns reactivity to political disclosures, the degree of dismay and outrage experienced when someone shares political views or affiliation different from our own. Relatedly, there is also our emotional response upon making a political discovery about another person, like seeing something they post on social media.
As we know, friendships have ended and families broken up by politics. Political views are shared or discovered and we find these so upsetting that the friendship ends and the family stops seeing each other.
For my part, I don't have strong emotional reactions when people disclose their political views or share who they will be voting for. I am also able to see, as an expression of cognitive empathy and perspective-sharing, other people's political concerns, even if I think those concerns wrong, overblown, delusional, or inconsistent. I can, and have, calmly chatted with conspiracy theorists. And in all this, I don't have a lot of emotion. I might be puzzled or perplexed, but I'm not upset. I don't have a sympathetic stress response talking about politics with people who hold different views.
I've wondered about this lack of a stress response, given the strong reactions I've observed among others. Narcissistically, I pride myself on this equanimity, given the state of our current political discourse, but I also worry about it. As I ponder my lack of reactivity, I've floated the following hypotheses:
Privilege and Social Location:
As a white, middle-class male I'm more insulated from political marginalization and so can adopt a more "objective" and detached view since I'm going to be okay regardless who wins an election.
Temperament:
Concerning the Big Five personality traits I score very low on Neuroticism. Which is to say I'm not prone to negative emotional states. My mood is pretty steady, positive, and non-reactive across the board. Given this, it's possible that my non-reactivity to political disclosures isn't a specific capacity but is rooted in my general temperament. I don't get worked up about politics because I don't really get worked up about anything.
Practiced Tolerance:
In training to be a therapist you grow practiced in providing unconditional positive regard to people no matter who they are, what they have done, or how they think. Most people haven't had much practice sitting with difference or being non-reactive in the face of disclosures, especially shocking disclosures. It's like being a priest hearing a confession. Also, as a college professor I've become very practiced at speaking to "both sides" of political issues so that my liberal and conservative students each will feel safe and feel heard. I've become practiced at presenting and discussing controversial issues in a very unbiased way which aids in perspective-taking.
Idolatry:
This is my most judgmental take on the world, that our excessive reactivity to political disclosures reveals an over-investment in electoral politics and a tribalized political identity that has lost its grounding in Christ. Non-reactivity, and I admit this view is very self-serving, may indicate that our relationship to politics is a "well-ordered" desire, put in its proper place, rather than excessively disordered and idolatrous.
For my social science readers, I'd love to perform a regression analysis on all this, to see how these four variables might predict our degree of reactivity to political disclosures. I wonder what the beta weights would be, which variables would have the greatest impact in predicting reactivity.
Regardless, this reactivity to political disclosures, our sympathetic stress response to people sharing how they are voting, is something that seems to vary among us. And the degree to which this reactivity is rooted in idolatry would make it an object of spiritual formation.
I'd be curious to tease out if there are spaces or times of life in which you feel in control of the topic space, and others in which you haven't.
I suspect that in your roles as blogger, professor, speaker, author, and Bible study class leader, you enter a lot of conversations in a position of topical control; if a subject comes up that threatens the coherence of the community, you have the power to change the subject, and if there's no way to find common ground, it is unlikely that you will be the one ejected from the room.
Are there other times of life or environments in which others control the topics discussed, and you feel more disposable? When you're spending more time in those spaces, do you find yourself reacting differently?
I know that I can be reactive in ways that trouble me, but I connect that to experiences in which I have found myself to be a disposable member of a community, and therefore have a heightened awareness about whether _this_ is the discussion that is going to start cutting the ties that bind again...
I appreciate this but I disagree about one thing for one reason. It's the "white...middle class" comment. The angriest people I encounter are white middle class people.