Dear Crucial Skills,
How do you respond when someone labels or insults people for voting for a specific candidate—for example, implying they’re immoral or unintelligent? This approach often shuts down discussion and discourages people from speaking up to avoid conflict.
Signed,
Shut Down
Dear Shut Down,
Let’s be honest, political conversations today often feel like no-win situations. You start out trying to have a rational discussion about an issue (immigration reform, defense spending, climate policy, etc.) and suddenly—boom—you’re being told you’re heartless, brainwashed, or morally bankrupt.
I’ve been there. In fact, this exact thing happened to me a few months ago with some of my closest friends. It’s frustrating and exhausting. But before we talk about what to do when this happens, I want to talk about why it happens.
Why This Happens
We care. That’s the root of it. We care about our country, fairness, rights, and people’s well-being. But caring can easily morph into something more dangerous: moral framing.
When we label someone as a “partisan hack” or an “extremist,” we stop seeing them as a human being with a different point of view—we start seeing them as the villain. A villain who is a threat to our most cherished values and beliefs. And once someone’s a villain, contempt becomes easy. We justify our eyerolls, our sarcasm, and eventually, our silence or attacks.
But here’s the thing: you can’t have dialogue with someone you’ve decided is evil. You can only fight them.
What to Do Instead
Name It
Don’t sit silently when someone attacks or labels you. Silence sends the message that it’s okay. You don’t have to fight back—just name what’s happening.
“Hey, when you said people who share my opinions are ignorant, that didn’t feel right to me. I get that you’re passionate, but I’d rather we talk about the issue, not each other.”
That simple nudge re-centers the conversation on respect.
Take It to the Next Level
When you’ve had the same frustrating exchange over and over, stop debating the topic and talk about the pattern and relationship.
Use this diagnostic skill: CPR. It stands for Content, Pattern, Relationship.
- Content: the issue itself (taxes, elections, etc.)
- Pattern: the repeated behavior (“The last few times we talked politics, you called people names.”)
- Relationship: how the pattern affects trust (“It’s getting hard for me to want to talk about anything important with you because these conversations don’t feel respectful anymore.”)
When you name the pattern and possibly how it affects the relationship, you move from fighting over opinions to protecting the relationship—and that’s where real dialogue begins.
Set the Rules
Say, for example, you’re in a group chat with friends or coworkers where conversations range from sports to politics. Things are usually fine—until one day, someone starts using harsh labels about people who see things differently. You try engaging on the issues, but it only gets worse. Eventually, someone speaks up and says, “Hey, I like debating these topics, but I don’t want to do it this way. If the conversation is going to go this way, then I’d rather not do it at all.”
That simple expectation can reset the tone. Others might even thank you afterward. If people won’t follow those rules, that’s fine—but you don’t have to play.
Know When to Quit
Sometimes, after trying to shift the conversation, you won’t see much change. In this situation you may find that walking away is the healthy move. You can care about someone and still choose not to discuss topics that consistently leave you angry or drained.
There’s absolutely no shame in stepping away from a toxic political conversation. You’re simply done expending energy on a conversation going nowhere…and that’s ok.
People keep saying our society can’t talk anymore. Prove them wrong. And if you’ve found an effective way to do that, please share it. I’d love to hear your solutions in the comments below.
Thank you for these real-life application examples, especially with difficult topics like politics. It often feels “too hard” or “not worth it” to engage, but the Crucial skills are always applicable. Thanks for the reminder and nudge to engage differently!
Contempt is such a dangerous emotion. It feels as though media, especially social media, too often seeks to focus our attention on the most base aspects of our fellow humans – inviting and even rewarding contempt on a massive scale. Recognizing that external push and internal pull toward contempt is critical to overcoming it.
I have noticed a distinct pattern of highly entrenched beliefs in society related to politics, health mandates, immigration, etc. I have begun to name the behavior (i.e. we are so polarized we can’t talk anymore) and a potential cause …… algorithmic feeds which create echo chambers and reinforce beliefs.
Thank you for this article- very pertinent, especially as family gathers for the holidays.
What I am further wondering is, when did it become okay to bring up politics in a work setting? It used to be that was a taboo subject (like religion) and was addressed as such by HR. But these past 5+ years, I can’t count how many times I’ve been stuck in a meeting where people are just venting about politics, including HR staff!
When did the rules change? I am very perplexed by this. It’s gotten to where I get so exasperated I just tell everyone to ping me when they are back on work-related topics so I don’t waste my time.
Oftentimes, simply asking the other person to please explain what has personally happened to them that causes them to feel/think this way is a way to soften the conversation. They’ll believe you care enough to understand, and forming an answer to a question may allow them to take a beat away from the rhetoric.
Try this. When someone says an offensive thing say “Who are you quoting? That could not possibly be your thought.”
I’ve found that acknowledging what someone thinks, restating so they agree I heard them, then asking to explain it to me, without pressure or noting inconsistencies, tends to tone down the conversation. I expressly do not aim to change their views.
And when religion comes in (almost always toxic, both sides), read “Separation of Church and Hate”, John Fugelsang) ISBN: 9781668066898 (no CoI)
Good insights here in the comments- thank you everyone for sharing!