Today’s political climate is riddled with polarization and animosity. The question of remaining objective during political discourse is more important than ever. Meaningful political discourse is a valuable opportunity to engage with varying perspectives, but, political division is deepening. The growing presence of social media and algorithms only exacerbates this divide, which specifically affect Gen Z who were raised in this climate. Objectivity in political discourse can help bridge this divide by encouraging rational discussion without personal biases.
Although beneficial, objectivity is naturally difficult to achieve because politics is emotional and often tied to personal identity. It is deeply intertwined with values, morals and beliefs. Therefore, when talking about politics, remaining objective is absolutely critical, but there also needs to be understanding and compassion when addressing different perspectives.
The Importance of Objective Political Discourse
One of the main reasons why objectivity is often beneficial in political discussions is that it can encourage people to separate facts from opinions. Politics is now increasingly full of misinformation and biases which can influence our judgment. Objectivity can ensure that discussions are based on verified facts rather than subjective interpretations. This can help decrease partisanship while bridging political divides. In recent political climates, there has been a loss in problem-solving during non-objective discourse and a shift to winning the argument. This can stifle conversation and limit opportunities for compromise.
Difficulties of Remaining Objective
In 2021, Pew Research Center found that approximately six out of 10 U.S. adults find conversations about politics difficult when discussing with people who disagree with their views. More specifically, 60 percent of Democrats feel frustrated and stressed talking to someone who disagrees with their views, while 58% of Republicans feel the same. Moderates of each party find these conversations less difficult.
One reason to explain this could be the ingrained emotional and moral factors that exist within political beliefs. When someone challenges a person’s deeply held beliefs, it can feel like an attack on their identity. This explains why political debates often become heated and personal, preventing people from engaging in productive discussions.
Furthermore, an individual’s political beliefs are heavily shaped by their personal backgrounds, experiences and the media they consume. Kevin M. Graham from Creighton University stated, “Not every form of injustice is or can be made equally evident to every member of society. In some cases, members of privileged groups remain unaware of existing injustices.”
For example, alleviating poverty not be a political priority to individuals coming from higher socio-economic backgrounds. Graham claims, “This inexperience with poverty can make it hard for them to accept claims about the variety and seriousness of the obstacles faced by those who are trying to overcome poverty.” The difference in backgrounds can establish differing beliefs with corresponding emotional attachments and why remaining objective is difficult.
Objectivity is particularly important when considering the role of Gen Z in today’s political climate. Born into an era of social media and growing activism, many political issues have become deeply personal to many of Gen Z. For many in this generation, politics is about their identity and their role in the world. Gen Z was raised in an environment where issues like racial justice, climate change, LGBTQ+ rights and economic inequality are urgent issues that require immediate action. Through this context, remaining objective in political discourse can sometimes feel like an intellectual luxury and a detachment from the real-world consequences.
Despite these challenges, objective political discourse should not be dismissed. While emotional understanding is necessary to fully comprehend the importance of many issues, objectivity can encourage more nuanced discussions. There must be a balanced approach to discussion in order to minimize polarizing rhetorics and animosity between differing views. Political conversations need to be approached with an open mind, acknowledging different opinions and striving to understand the underlying values that shape them. This can create an environment where discourse can flourish and solve issues rather than disintegrate into hostile arguments.
Acknowledgment: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author
