Return to Video

How to have better political conversations

  • 0:01 - 0:03
    So you probably have the sense,
  • 0:03 - 0:04
    as most people do,
  • 0:04 - 0:08
    that polarization is getting worse
    in our country,
  • 0:08 - 0:11
    that the divide between
    the left and the right
  • 0:11 - 0:15
    is as bad as it's been in really
    any of our lifetimes.
  • 0:15 - 0:18
    But you might also reasonably wonder
  • 0:18 - 0:21
    if research backs up your intuition.
  • 0:21 - 0:26
    And in a nutshell,
    the answer is sadly yes.
  • 0:26 - 0:29
    In study after study, we find
  • 0:29 - 0:33
    that liberals and conservatives
    have grown further apart.
  • 0:33 - 0:38
    They increasingly wall themselves off
    in these ideological silos,
  • 0:38 - 0:40
    consuming different news,
  • 0:40 - 0:42
    talking only to likeminded others,
  • 0:42 - 0:46
    and more and more choosing to live
    in different parts of the country.
  • 0:46 - 0:51
    And I think that most alarming
    of all of it is seeing this rising
  • 0:51 - 0:55
    animosity on both sides.
  • 0:55 - 0:56
    Liberals and conservatives,
  • 0:56 - 0:58
    Democrats and Republicans,
  • 0:58 - 1:02
    more and more they just
    don't like one another.
  • 1:02 - 1:05
    You see it in many different ways.
  • 1:05 - 1:06
    They don't want to befriend one another.
  • 1:06 - 1:07
    They don't want to date one another.
  • 1:07 - 1:09
    If they do, if they find out,
  • 1:09 - 1:12
    they find each other less attractive,
  • 1:12 - 1:15
    and they more and more don't want
    their children to marry someone
  • 1:15 - 1:17
    who supports the other party,
  • 1:17 - 1:19
    a particularly shocking statistic.
  • 1:19 - 1:23
    You know, in my lab,
    the students that I work with,
  • 1:23 - 1:26
    we're talking about some
    sort of social pattern,
  • 1:26 - 1:27
    I'm a movie buff,
  • 1:27 - 1:29
    and so I'm often like,
  • 1:29 - 1:33
    what kind of movie are we in here
    with this pattern?
  • 1:33 - 1:39
    So what kind of movie are we in
    with political polarization?
  • 1:39 - 1:41
    Well, it could be a disaster movie.
  • 1:41 - 1:43
    It certainly seems like a disaster.
  • 1:43 - 1:45
    Could be a war movie.
  • 1:45 - 1:47
    Also fits.
  • 1:47 - 1:51
    But what I keep thinking is that
    we're in a zombie apocalypse movie.
  • 1:51 - 1:53
    (Laughter)
  • 1:53 - 1:55
    Right? You know the kind.
  • 1:55 - 1:58
    There's people wandering around in packs,
  • 1:58 - 2:00
    not thinking for themselves,
  • 2:00 - 2:03
    seized by this mob mentality
    trying to spread their disease
  • 2:03 - 2:06
    and destroy society.
  • 2:06 - 2:08
    And you probably think, as I do,
  • 2:08 - 2:11
    that you're the good guy
    in the zombie apocalypse movie,
  • 2:11 - 2:15
    and all this hate and polarization,
    it's being propagated by the other people,
  • 2:15 - 2:17
    because we're Brad Pitt, right?
  • 2:17 - 2:20
    Free-thinking, righteous,
  • 2:20 - 2:23
    just trying to hold on
    to what we hold dear,
  • 2:23 - 2:27
    you know, not foot soldiers
    in the army of the undead.
  • 2:27 - 2:28
    Not that.
  • 2:28 - 2:30
    Never that.
  • 2:30 - 2:32
    But here's the thing:
  • 2:32 - 2:35
    what movie do you suppose
    they think they're in?
  • 2:35 - 2:37
    Right?
  • 2:37 - 2:39
    Well, they absolutely think
    that they're the good guys
  • 2:39 - 2:41
    in the zombie apocalypse movie. Right?
  • 2:41 - 2:44
    And you'd better believe that they think
    that they're Brad Pitt
  • 2:44 - 2:48
    and that we, we are the zombies.
  • 2:48 - 2:51
    And who's to say that they're wrong?
  • 2:53 - 2:56
    I think that the truth is
    that we're all a part of this.
  • 2:56 - 3:01
    And the good side of that is that we
    can be a part of the solution.
  • 3:01 - 3:03
    So what are we going to do?
  • 3:03 - 3:08
    What can we do to chip away
    at polarization in everyday life?
  • 3:08 - 3:11
    What could we do to connect with
    and communicate with
  • 3:11 - 3:14
    our political counterparts?
  • 3:14 - 3:18
    Well, these were exactly the questions
    that I and my colleague Matt Feinberg
  • 3:18 - 3:21
    became fascinated with a few years ago,
    and we started doing research
  • 3:21 - 3:23
    on this topic.
  • 3:23 - 3:26
    And one of the first things
    that we discovered
  • 3:26 - 3:29
    that I think is really helpful
    for understanding polarization
  • 3:29 - 3:33
    is to understand that the political divide
    in our country is undergirded
  • 3:33 - 3:35
    by a deeper moral divide.
  • 3:35 - 3:40
    So one of the most robust findings
    in the history of political psychology
  • 3:40 - 3:44
    is this pattern identified
    by John Hyatt and Jesse Graham,
  • 3:44 - 3:45
    psychologists,
  • 3:45 - 3:49
    that liberals and conservatives
    tend to endorse different values
  • 3:49 - 3:51
    to different degrees.
  • 3:51 - 3:56
    So for example, we find that liberals
    tend to endorse values like equality
  • 3:56 - 4:00
    and fairness and care
    and protection from harm
  • 4:00 - 4:02
    more than conservatives do,
  • 4:02 - 4:07
    and conservatives tend to endorse
    values like loyalty, patriotism,
  • 4:07 - 4:11
    respect for authority, and moral purity
  • 4:11 - 4:14
    more than liberals do.
  • 4:14 - 4:18
    And Matt and I were thinking
    that maybe this moral divide
  • 4:18 - 4:22
    might be helpful for understanding
    how it is that liberals and conservatives
  • 4:22 - 4:26
    talk to one another and why they so often
    seem to talk past one another
  • 4:26 - 4:27
    when they do.
  • 4:27 - 4:30
    So we conducted a study
  • 4:30 - 4:32
    where we recruited liberals to a study
  • 4:32 - 4:35
    where they were supposed to write
    a persuasive essay that would be
  • 4:35 - 4:36
    compelling to a conservative
  • 4:36 - 4:40
    in support of same-sex marriage.
  • 4:40 - 4:43
    And what we found was that liberals
    tended to make the arguments
  • 4:43 - 4:47
    in terms of the liberal moral values
    of equality and fairness.
  • 4:47 - 4:49
    So they said things like
  • 4:49 - 4:53
    "everyone should have the right
    to love whoever they choose,"
  • 4:53 - 4:56
    and "they" -- they being gay Americans --
    "deserve the same equal rights
  • 4:56 - 4:58
    as other Americans."
  • 4:58 - 5:01
    Overall, we found that
    69 percent of liberals
  • 5:01 - 5:07
    invoked one of the more liberal
    moral values in constructing their essay,
  • 5:07 - 5:11
    and only nine percent invoked
    one of the more conservative moral values,
  • 5:11 - 5:14
    even though they were supposed to be
    trying to persuade conservatives.
  • 5:14 - 5:19
    And when we studied conservatives
    and had them make persuasive arguments
  • 5:19 - 5:22
    in support of making English
    the official language of the US,
  • 5:22 - 5:24
    a classically conservative
    political position,
  • 5:24 - 5:26
    we found that they weren't
    much better at this.
  • 5:26 - 5:29
    59 percent of them made arguments
    in terms of one of the more
  • 5:29 - 5:31
    conservative moral values,
  • 5:31 - 5:34
    and just eight percent invoked
    a liberal moral value,
  • 5:34 - 5:37
    even though they were supposed
    to be targeting liberals for persuasion.
  • 5:37 - 5:42
    Now, you can see right away
    why we're in trouble here. Right?
  • 5:42 - 5:44
    People's moral values,
  • 5:44 - 5:46
    they're their most deeply held beliefs.
  • 5:46 - 5:50
    People are willing to fight
    and die for their values.
  • 5:50 - 5:52
    Why are they going to give that up
    just to agree with you
  • 5:52 - 5:55
    on something that they don't particularly
    want to agree with you on anyway?
  • 5:55 - 5:59
    If that persuasive appeal that
    you're making to your Republican uncle
  • 5:59 - 6:01
    means that he doesn't just have
    to change his view,
  • 6:01 - 6:04
    he's got to change
    his underlying values too,
  • 6:04 - 6:06
    that's not going to go very far.
  • 6:06 - 6:08
    So what would work better?
  • 6:08 - 6:13
    Well, we believe it's a technique
    that we call moral reframing,
  • 6:13 - 6:15
    and we've studied it
    in a series of experiments.
  • 6:15 - 6:17
    In one of these experiments,
  • 6:17 - 6:20
    we recruited liberals and
    conservatives to a study
  • 6:20 - 6:22
    where they read one of three essays
  • 6:22 - 6:26
    before having their environmental
    attitudes surveyed.
  • 6:26 - 6:27
    And the first of these essays
  • 6:27 - 6:31
    was a relatively conventional
    pro-environmental essay
  • 6:31 - 6:35
    that invoked the liberal values
    of care and protection from harm.
  • 6:35 - 6:37
    It said things like
    "in many important ways
  • 6:37 - 6:40
    we are causing real harm
    to the places we live in,"
  • 6:40 - 6:43
    and "it is essential
    that we take steps now
  • 6:43 - 6:46
    to prevent further destruction
    from being done to our Earth."
  • 6:46 - 6:49
    Another group of participants
    were assigned to read
  • 6:49 - 6:51
    a really different essay
  • 6:51 - 6:54
    that was designed to tap into
    the conservative value
  • 6:54 - 6:56
    of moral purity.
  • 6:56 - 6:58
    It was a pro-environmental essay as well,
  • 6:58 - 6:59
    and it said things like
  • 6:59 - 7:04
    "keeping our forests, drinking water,
    and skies pure is of vital importance."
  • 7:04 - 7:09
    "We should regard the pollution of
    the places we live in to be disgusting."
  • 7:09 - 7:11
    And "reducing pollution
    can help us preserve
  • 7:11 - 7:15
    what is pure and beautiful
    about the places we live."
  • 7:15 - 7:18
    And then we had
    a third group of participants
  • 7:18 - 7:19
    that were assigned to read
    just a non-political essay.
  • 7:19 - 7:22
    It was just a comparison group
    so we could get a baseline.
  • 7:22 - 7:24
    And what we found
    when we surveyed people
  • 7:24 - 7:26
    about their environmental
    attitudes afterwards,
  • 7:26 - 7:29
    we found that liberals, it didn't
    really matter what essay they read.
  • 7:29 - 7:32
    They tended to have highly
    pro-environmental attitudes regardless.
  • 7:32 - 7:35
    Liberals are on board
    for environmental protection.
  • 7:35 - 7:36
    Conservatives, however,
  • 7:36 - 7:41
    were significantly more supportive
    of progressive environmental policies
  • 7:41 - 7:43
    and environmental protection
  • 7:43 - 7:45
    if they had read the moral purity essay
  • 7:45 - 7:48
    than if they read
    one of the other two essays.
  • 7:48 - 7:51
    We even found that conservatives
    who read the moral purity essay
  • 7:51 - 7:54
    were significantly more likely
    to say that they believed
  • 7:54 - 7:56
    in global warming and were
    concerned about global warming
  • 7:56 - 7:59
    even though this essay
    didn't even mention global warming.
  • 7:59 - 8:02
    That's just a related environmental issue.
  • 8:02 - 8:06
    But that's how robust
    this moral reframing effect was.
  • 8:06 - 8:10
    And we've studied this on a whole slew
    of different political issues.
  • 8:10 - 8:13
    So if you want to move conservatives
  • 8:13 - 8:17
    on issues like same-sex marriage
    or national health insurance,
  • 8:17 - 8:20
    it helps to tie these liberal
    political issues to conservative values
  • 8:20 - 8:23
    like patriotism and moral purity.
  • 8:23 - 8:26
    And we studied it the other way too.
  • 8:26 - 8:30
    If you want to move liberals
    to the right on conservative policy issues
  • 8:30 - 8:34
    like military spending and making English
    the official language of the US,
  • 8:34 - 8:36
    you're going to be more persuasive
  • 8:36 - 8:40
    if you tie those conservative
    policy issues to liberal moral values
  • 8:40 - 8:43
    like equality and fairness.
  • 8:43 - 8:46
    All these studies have
    the same clear message:
  • 8:46 - 8:49
    if you want to persuade
    someone on some policy,
  • 8:49 - 8:54
    it's helpful to connect that policy
    to their underlying moral values.
  • 8:54 - 8:56
    And when you say it like that
  • 8:56 - 8:58
    it seems really obvious. Right?
  • 8:58 - 8:59
    Like, why did we come here tonight?
  • 8:59 - 9:00
    Why -- ?
  • 9:00 - 9:02
    (Laughter)
  • 9:02 - 9:03
    It's incredibly intuitive.
  • 9:03 - 9:09
    And even though it is, it's something
    we really struggle to do.
  • 9:09 - 9:12
    You know, it turns out that when
    we go to persuade somebody
  • 9:12 - 9:13
    on a political issue,
  • 9:13 - 9:16
    we talk like we're speaking
    into a mirror.
  • 9:16 - 9:19
    We don't persuade so much as
    we rehearse our own reasons
  • 9:19 - 9:23
    for why we believe some sort
    of political position.
  • 9:23 - 9:25
    We kept saying when we were designing
    these reframed moral arguments,
  • 9:25 - 9:31
    empathy and respect, empathy and respect.
  • 9:31 - 9:33
    If you can tap into that,
  • 9:33 - 9:34
    you can connect,
  • 9:34 - 9:38
    and you might be able to persuade
    somebody in this country.
  • 9:38 - 9:40
    So thinking again
  • 9:40 - 9:43
    about what movie we're in,
  • 9:43 - 9:45
    maybe I got carried away before.
  • 9:45 - 9:47
    Maybe it's not a zombie apocalypse movie.
  • 9:47 - 9:50
    Maybe instead it's a buddy cop movie.
  • 9:50 - 9:52
    (Laughter)
  • 9:52 - 9:54
    Just roll with it, just go with it please.
  • 9:54 - 9:56
    (Laughter)
  • 9:56 - 9:58
    You know the kind:
  • 9:58 - 9:59
    there's a white cop and a black cop,
  • 9:59 - 10:02
    or maybe a messy cop and an organized cop.
  • 10:02 - 10:04
    Whatever it is, they don't get along
  • 10:04 - 10:06
    because of this difference.
  • 10:06 - 10:09
    But in the end, when they have
    to come together and they cooperate,
  • 10:09 - 10:11
    the solidarity that they feel,
  • 10:11 - 10:15
    it's greater because of that gulf
    that they had to cross. Right?
  • 10:15 - 10:17
    And remember that in these movies,
  • 10:17 - 10:20
    it's usually worst in the second act
  • 10:20 - 10:24
    when our leads are further apart
    than ever before.
  • 10:24 - 10:26
    And so maybe that's where
    we are in this country,
  • 10:26 - 10:28
    late in the second act
    of a buddy cop movie --
  • 10:28 - 10:31
    (Laughter) --
  • 10:31 - 10:35
    torn apart but about to come
    back together.
  • 10:35 - 10:37
    It sounds good,
  • 10:37 - 10:39
    but if we want it to happen,
  • 10:39 - 10:43
    I think the responsibility
    is going to start with us.
  • 10:43 - 10:45
    So this is my call to you:
  • 10:45 - 10:49
    let's put this country back together.
  • 10:49 - 10:52
    Let's do it despite the politicians
  • 10:52 - 10:55
    and the media and Facebook and Twitter
  • 10:55 - 10:58
    and Congressional redistricting
    and all of it, all the things
  • 10:58 - 11:00
    that divide us.
  • 11:00 - 11:03
    Let's do it because it's right.
  • 11:03 - 11:07
    And let's do it because this hate
  • 11:07 - 11:13
    and contempt that flows through
    all of us every day make us ugly
  • 11:13 - 11:15
    and it corrupts us,
  • 11:15 - 11:19
    and it threatens the very
    fabric of our society.
  • 11:19 - 11:23
    We owe it to one another and our country
  • 11:23 - 11:26
    to reach out and try to connect.
  • 11:26 - 11:30
    We can't afford to hate them any longer,
  • 11:30 - 11:34
    and we can't afford
    to let them hate us either.
  • 11:34 - 11:36
    Empathy and respect.
  • 11:36 - 11:38
    Empathy and respect.
  • 11:38 - 11:42
    If you think about it, it's the very least
    that we owe our fellow citizens.
  • 11:42 - 11:44
    Thank you.
  • 11:44 - 11:48
    (Applause)
Title:
How to have better political conversations
Speaker:
Robb Willer
Description:

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Team:
closed TED
Project:
TEDTalks
Duration:
12:01

English subtitles

Revisions Compare revisions