My favorite Game of Thrones character is Jaime Lannister. Not because he incestuously fathered three children, murdered his cousin, or paralyzed a 10 year old boy (admittedly not the best resume), but because after eight seasons of broken vows, misguided ethics, and needless violence, he embodied redemption. He still made mistakes, but was so very human that I couldn’t help but root for him.
Though we don’t live in medieval times anymore, I find that I draw many comparisons of daily interactions to Jaime’s character development. If he were to read our newspaper headlines today, I don’t think we could blame him if he concluded the world was on the brink of collapse. So resides our negativity bias.
Much like I argue for Jaime’s humanity, though, I hope to address here three major issues I find with our current political environment. Not to condone any view, but a need for empathy.
1: We are too convinced of our righteousness.
I find that people are often weirdly married to beliefs. Regardless of topic, it can feel as though a deeper dive into the “why” results in a trailing, “because… it’s better.” Indeed, the world overflows with messages of persuasion, and it’s hard to isolate the noise. It screams for us to choose sides, claiming good or bad as black and white, despite our better judgment knowing it is not (or at least, it’s not that simple). As a result, we get attached to extreme identities only to quietly lose ours, resulting in arguments of name-calling and finger-pointing.
I don’t argue for less disagreement however. I believe uncertainty and confusion can actually be ideal as an individual, for you constantly question to understand what views demand most attention. Without such reason, beliefs tend to just be preferences born out of self-interest. It seems to me we colloquially agree that constructive discussion is always better than disingenuous agreement, yet we often rip ourselves apart before we’ve even accepted that premise.
From The New Yorker.
Just like sports is an exercise in respectful rivalry, I hope this apolitical example reminds us how we can set aside differences sometimes.
2: That righteousness prompts the belief that the other side is impossibly evil.
I don’t believe intolerance for ideologies to be what’s most problematic today, but contempt directly towards people. In psychology, our “motive attribution asymmetry” assumes we are moved by love, while the other side by hate. Outrage, extremity, and sensationalism feed our addictive drive to unite against such hate.
I applaud unity for its necessity to empowerment, but with the Internet, I’m equally afraid of the paradox: unity’s abuse. We’ve seen how recent phenomenon like cancel culture can sway online groups into toxic behavior without the proper evidence. Journalism and activism is so powerful, but I think many would agree that social media is riddled with its own destructive behavior. Despite such comments online, we know that we can’t take away that freedom to express our opinion. That doesn’t mean regulation shouldn’t exist, but that’s a different can of worms.
Even when anonymity isn’t present, any gander online (YouTube) reveals immense cyberbullying.
3: If we pride ourselves on freedom, then we can’t eradicate hate.
To be free is to hate. I appreciate the movements to reduce hate, as that’s almost always a well-intended cause. But, I don’t think it’s quite as simple for us to believe that “love is the answer.” Love is equally passionate, and moves us to terrible actions when we believe to be only correct. Just look at relationships.
I think that with America’s institution of freedom, hate will always exist to an extent, whether through trolls, radicals, or begrudged individuals. I don’t mean to simply allow hate speech or anything of the sort. Condemning both dangerous and false statements is paramount to all groups, but no progress is made if our response is to degrade someone’s identity over a mistaken moral. Hate stunts progress, and no one will be hated into agreement.
“It’s really a wonder that I haven’t dropped all my ideals, because they seem so absurd and impractical to carry out. Yet I keep them, because in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart.”
- Anne Frank
Maybe we can’t eradicate hate, but we can move beyond it.
It’s easy to point this discussion at opponent political parties, but I hope the message reminds us of every person’s situation. With refugee crises and international fighting, we should see people as giving members of society, not families seeking to only take. Many of us started out that way, though perhaps years ago and not today.
Yes, we’re intellectually vain, and some people won’t ever change. It’s demotivating, but it’s helpful to remind ourselves that we live in the best time in history. More movement, change, and possibility exists today than any other period. So, in a social culture that breeds toxicity, validates diatribe, and skirts responsibility, hate won’t be ended with punishment, but by immunity. Immunity to look past our very human acts of provocation.
We need empathy. It’s obvious, but it’s because it’s obvious that we forget so often about it. I get angry, act stubborn, and forget what I preach too. Still, I hope we remind ourselves of forgiveness, because people are not so one-dimensional that a belief dismisses their humanity. There’s lots of Jaime’s out there, that only need a gentle push to be better.
Not the incest, murder, or paralyzing part, mind you.