A fine balance

How can Christians move past polarization? CC’s Editor Angela Reitsma Bick asked Psychology Professor Dr. Lucian Gideon Conway III to use his expertise in the psychology of culture and politics to answer that question. 

CC: We all have examples of the deep divides in our country, churches and families. What tools can we use to understand each other better? 

Dr. Conway: Research shows that one of the most important variables in getting past polarization is finding a common identity. To the degree that people focus on things they deeply share, polarization is often reduced.

The good news is that as Christians, we have a deeply shared common identity in Christ. The bad news is that we have a lot of disagreement about how our faith fits into the modern ideological landscape. It is quite easy to say “let’s set aside our differences and follow Christ,” but it is quite hard when some of the issues that divide us are ones that people believe Christ himself cares deeply about.

What to do about that? Before we get to the practical side, there is a kind of initial spiritual condition that must be met. Surveys show that Christians increasingly care more about their political identity than their identity in Christ. As long as (here in the U.S., for example) we care more about being Republican or Democrat than being a Christ-follower, nothing else that comes after the equals sign will matter. So all of us – me included – should take a good hard look in the mirror to be sure we are really grounded in our eternal Savior and not in temporal politics.

Politics do matter, of course. My personal motto about politics is “Jesus > Politics.” But that isn’t to belittle the importance of politics. Politics are people, and God cares about people. The Holocaust was politics, and God cares about that. But what Jesus > Politics means to me is that every idea, every political thing we do, has to be subservient to him, to his truth, to his love, and infused with his grace. That has to be the goal.

CC: Right. That makes sense.

Conway: Now, that was just a precursor to answering your question. It is a caveat. No psychological principle will help us if we are not grounded in Christ more than in our political party or denomination (or any other thing). It would be like doing all the post-operation stuff your doctor told you to do . . . but forgetting to show up for the surgery to remove the tumor.

Assuming that we do first show up for the metaphorical surgery, there are plenty of practical things psychological research suggests we can do. In my book Liberal Bullies, I talk about two psychological principles that are particularly relevant. First, realize that agreement does not equal love. We have fallen into a psychological trap of equating agreeing with someone as in the same category as loving someone. The exact opposite is obviously true: Love begins where agreement ends. It is easy to “love” someone who always agrees with you; it is precisely where they stop agreeing with you that love is necessary. It is human nature to tend to love those who agree with us more – I fact, in psychology, the effect is so pervasive that it has a name: the Similarity-Attraction Effect.

Avoiding this effect has two psychological implications, both important. The first is that we should feel less anxiety about whether we agree on socio-political issues. The second is that we should argue more about socio-political issues.

CC: Interesting!

Conway: Part of the danger here is that we are simply afraid of arguing. I think rather we should argue more, but argue better. We should argue with both more freedom to be honest about what we believe and yet more love given to our opponents. There was this great project called the Stanford Strengthening Democracy challenge a few years ago that is relevant here. They solicited interventions to reduce hatred between political groups from researchers. They selected the best of the best interventions and then pitted them against each other in a scientific competition. The winner was surprisingly simple: They showed a video of people discussing controversial political issues but doing so respectfully and warmly. That’s it. Just seeing that reduced animosity across party lines.

This study didn’t have to do with Christianity, but the lesson is the same. The history of the church is filled with important debates. Sometimes we get sidetracked on dumb stuff. Sometimes the stuff we are debating is important. It is often hard to tell which is which in the moment. But throughout, we should argue and discuss and stop being afraid of disagreement. But we should do so respectfully and with grace. Arguing vigorously is important, but arguing with love is also important. Being able to do that is powerful.

A second psychological principle is to actively try to find common ground. Often people have radical misconceptions about their opponents. They go into conversations imagining their opponents hold a lot of beliefs that aren’t true, or that are partially true. It’s best to figure out what people believe before you judge their beliefs. And look for places where you agree as a starting point for disagreements.

CC: Can the study of psychology help here? Does your research give us any clues?

Conway: Research consistently shows that people tend to have really inaccurate views of their opponents. Democrats in the U.S. think 44 percent of Republicans are very wealthy, when it is actually only two percent. Republicans think 44 percent of Democrats are in a labor union, when it is only 11 percent. Both groups tend to think of the other group as really political, when most of them don’t talk about politics at the dinner table on either side. We collected a study [at Grove City College] last fall where we asked conservatives and liberals about their own beliefs in the run-up to the U.S. election. We also asked them about what they believed the other side believed. Liberals wildly overestimated the degree that conservatives supported the Nazis (almost no conservatives do). But guess what? Conservatives also overestimated the degree that liberals supported the Nazis (almost no liberals do). Liberals thought conservatives believed that Taylor Swift was a CIA operative even though few conservatives believe that; conservatives thought liberals supported eco-terrorism even though few liberals believe that. That isn’t to say there aren’t really deep ideological differences; there are. They are important. But most people actually prefer respectful disagreement to hatred. What happens a lot is that people go into a conversation already defensive because they think their opponents are of a different sort than they are. It would be helpful as a starting point to argument, to find out what the real differences are, rather than assuming your opponent holds a lot of views that they don’t in reality hold.

Again, none of this is to say that we shouldn’t care about truth. We should care about it very much. Debating and discussing it is important. Christianity draws some hard lines and if we are unwilling to keep those lines, we’re in trouble. Nor does this mean we all just sing a hymn and move forward. There are often real issues to discuss, and sometimes one side may be right. If that’s the case, it is important that the truth is fought for.

CC: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

Conway: You may think all this about reducing polarization is weird advice coming from someone who titled a book Liberal Bullies. But the point of that book was to talk about what psychological research suggests are the origins of authoritarianism and how best to deal with the difficult liberals who are bullies. The same principles generally apply to conservatives who are bullies. In fact, one of the best things to fight both polarization and authoritarianism is to apply the same good principle to your own group as to your opponent’s group. If you think someone in your opponent’s group is guilty of violating principle X, then you should be quick to note when someone in your group violates principle X. And don’t be afraid to go out of your way to be kind to someone you disagree with – yes, even if you think “they are not Christian” anymore because of their beliefs! You may be right, it is possible they really have left traditional Christianity. But even if that is the case, it will do a lot of good to love them well.