Unless you live on another planet, you’ve probably noticed an up-tick in “social distancing”. Not just the 1.5 metre type, but people falling out over polarising politics. Whether you’re a member of , , Black Rights or Extinction Rebellion what’s mutual is a heightening barbed-wire fence of intolerance for a view unlike ours.
Facebook, with its rants and styled personas, is where our philosophical apartheid is most public. Here, people erupt with threats to block/de-friend/delete former friends who’ve evolved into evil conspiracy theorists or brainwashed sheep – depending on which side you’re camped on.
Fearing social genocide, I almost put out a Brian Ferry style public notice: C’mon, c’mon, let’s stick together.
Deep down, I wasn’t so sure.
And I was confused. Once decent people were slanging others, acting like the communist regime or all holier than thou. Was I too?
Mostly, I was aggravated by the way people argued, voicing their opinions aggressively without the mutual obligation of listening or respect for difference. Was their friendship worth the hassle? On the other hand, I might miss his/her humour, generosity, or some other attribute. And, with few of us agreeing on everything, isn't disagreement normal? Should we practice more tolerance for political diversity?
Mostly, I was aggravated by the way people argued, voicing their opinions aggressively without the mutual obligation of listening or respect for difference.
I almost craved the past when friends’ beliefs in conspiracy theories were considered charming eccentricities rather than something to fall out over.
What had happened? And, why are we so triggered by the failure of others to see things as we do?
According to , Associate Professor of Philosophy at Deakin University, opinions are core to our identity and understanding of the world. Thus, derogatory statements – of the ‘dumb sheep’, ‘tin-foil hats’, or ‘right-wing racists’ calibre – feel like an attack on our image of ourselves as intelligent, kind, or whatever the case.
An increase in narcissism related to social media use fuels the problem, he says. “Narcissism is always fragile. If your identity is vested in a certain social image of yourself, all somebody needs to say is ‘well, actually, you’re not that kind of person’ and then you feel like that’s a damaging insult.”
Social media and media saturates us with divisive explanations for why others have got it wrong, Sharpe adds. “They have been brainwashed by fake media or false news, social media, nefarious elites, political correctness, or whatever. Personalised news, profiling and algorithms that feed us opinions we already agree with contributes to highly polarised views,” he says.
“Communicating via screens leads people to attack and rant at each other in ways they would never dream of face-to-face. Social media also feeds our weaker sides – vanity and capacity for hatred,” he says. “They know we each have scarce resources in terms of time, so they will try to feed us material that hits upon ‘activating emotions’: anger, hatred, outrage, lust. In most great ethical traditions these emotions are all considered to be negative and destructive in terms of your social relations. Everybody’s angry at the other person, but the other person feels exactly the same way.”
The higher the stakes around the issue, the more likely a difference of opinion will turn cancerous.
The higher the stakes around the issue, the more likely a difference of opinion will turn cancerous.
“It used to be the case that we could disagree but still believe the other person was basically a decent person with good intentions but a different view of how to get there,” Sharpe says. “This seems to be dropping out. It’s like we disagree and that’s because you’re crazy. Once you say that to somebody else they’re not going to like you either.”
Should we be friends with people with different views?
Leading social researcher, author and moral philosopher, warns Australia is becoming increasingly socially fragmented. Thus, it’s important to resist division and embrace our interdependence.
“The deepest truth about us is that we belong to a social species that calls on us to promote social harmony,” he says. “And we can do that even while we disagree violently and irrevocably with each other about all sorts of things. Diversity, difference, contrasts – these enrich a community as long as we deal with them in a spirit of compassion true to our nature as human beings.”
“While unstable times trigger fear and the refuge of prejudice, nobler impulses usually prevail in the end,” he says.
How to stay friendly despite differences
“We don’t have to hide our opinions, or ‘bury’ our differences,” Mackay says. However, it’s essential to handle debates with kindness and respect.
Sharpe says artificial avoidance of subjects can damage relationships if it seems like lying or not being authentic. One strategy that works for many is tacit agreement 'not to go there'.
Don’t take others opinions personally, respect that we’re all formed by different life experiences and no one is wrong voluntarily, Sharpe advises. “Everyone acts for the sake of what they think is good.”
Nonetheless, some political views will be so ethically unacceptable or debated so disrespectfully that friendship is impossible.
Even so, Mackay suggests, it’s best to be kind when fondness is not possible.
