For those who disapprove of President Trump, the mere mention of his name conjures up the most unpleasant qualities. To many, he is a bigot, a racist, a tyrant. He is our resident dumping ground for this nation’s sins, an emblem of white supremacy, a bastion of male privilege.
So profound are the transgressions of the President against this country that many who oppose him feel that supporting him to any degree is unforgivable. In fact, not only is it unforgivable, but it is an admission that you too are a bigot, a racist, and culpable for the regime of this tyrant.
We can certainly debate to what degree Trump embodies any of these qualities. In fact, I argue that he faithfully adheres to all of them.
However, I cannot and do not wish to quell that obstinate thought that some of the very qualities we despise in Trump have invaded his self-righteous opposition.
Trump champions an us-versus -them rhetoric. He exploits divisions in our society. He has relentlessly degraded the office of the presidency over his term that, at least for me, I cannot fathom a time when I identified America with a source of pride.
His language is deliberately and ferociously inflammatory. But we have become so incensed by this figure who is eternally pervasive in the national consciousness that we have dehumanized each other.
A recent article published in the Wall Street Journal explored one manifestation of this problem that predates Trump, the issue of campus free speech.
While Trump is often accused of waging war on free speech, in college campuses across the country, which are often insular liberal bubbles, it is the more conservative members of the student body who feel repressed. Of course, many of these restrictions simply arise from social pressures and the fear of deviance from the liberal norm. But we must also question the extent to which the liberal bubble is willing to stretch for some form of discussion.
Insulation is our armor. While we might like to tell ourselves that we simply cannot associate with the opposition because they have crossed some fundamental moral line, less speech instead of more speech has never been productive for a well-functioning democracy.
When we surrender nuance, discussion, and reason, we surrender that spark of idealism that Trump has mercilessly bludgeoned. In these confusing times, we must ask ourselves what we believe. Do we truly believe in free speech, even when this speech diverges from our own beliefs? And are we really in this together even though we disagree?
We live in a country with nearly 326 million people. Each of us carries unique experiences and beliefs shaped by our perspectives. If we hope to repair the divisions aggravated by the Trump presidency, we must approach each other from a point of understanding and compassion rather than contempt and obstinance.
Eve Passman
