Thanksgiving is a rare moment in these politically polarized times when people of opposing views are put together for many hours with no rules of engagement. Some families ban the discussion of politics to keep the peace, but this year, I think that will be hard to enforce. With the college kids seeing unrest on campuses, older folks shocked at a presidential primary without guardrails, and everyone thinking about terrorism, it will be hard to confine the discussion to family activities and sports.
In fact, for the past few years, the Thanksgiving holiday is now seen as a political opportunity for political interest groups. Really!
That’s right — they want to arm you with talking points for your unsuspecting relatives with odious views.
I first saw MoveOn start this a few years back with tips for talking to your Tea Party Uncle (archived here.) Other left-wing groups followed suit. Then the right responded, predictably. For example, National Review fought back last year. But this tactic became more popular. This year, even AEI (a right-wing think tank) just posted a set of tips, promoted in social media as “How to speak so your hipster nephew will listen this Thanksgiving.” And then we have Politico, an enabler of partisanship, writing today, “How to be the crazy uncle this Thanksgiving,” which is snarky advice on how to troll people about politics at dinner.
Enough!
We live in a time of dangerous polarization. Young people today don’t even know that America hasn’t been this divided since the American Civil War. One of the first things I say to young activists is: “This is not normal. This isn’t America. You have to say no to this polarization and start to fix our politics.”
Banning political discussion at family gatherings is just giving up. You’re telling your children that even family members can’t be civil to each other.
However, time with family should not be about “winning” arguments. Nobody wins a political argument with their uncle when you and he agree on so little. Doesn’t everyone understand that?
So what’s for dinner?
My strategy for years at family events is this: stay out of most debates, and find ways to lose the argument. Really!
Thanksgiving should be a time of listening to people and why they believe what they believe. So if a relative told me, “I think America really needs Bernie Sanders now…” yes, inside, I would think, “A socialist?” but I would instead say, sincerely, “Tell me why you like him so much.” Or, “Tell me what’s wrong with America that he’d be able to fix.”
And giving her ample to time to explain that, I’d then just say, “Thanks! I’ll think about that.” And then I wouldn’t continue the argument.
People are often shocked when you don’t counter-attack, especially when they know you don’t agree. Maybe she’d say, “So, who are you supporting for president?” And then I would say, “I’m still shopping around, finding out why people are liking this person or that one.”
I recommend finding all kinds of ways to concede things! Consider any of the following phrases when provoked:
“Thank for you for telling me what you think.”
“You know, maybe you’re right about that. I’ll have to think about it.”
“On that point, you win the argument.”
(I once told someone on Twitter: you win the argument, and let it go. He nearly fainted.)
I know it would seem hard to say things like that, but nobody is writing down your responses. But they will remember that you listened and that you didn’t attack when you could have.
Yes, there are a few people who just won’t be nice about it, even if you’re a diplomat. In those cases, you probably have to say something like, “I don’t think talking politics is going to work out for us,” or, “I don’t think we agree on enough to talk about this, so I am going to have to preemptively surrender, OK?”
BUT I AM… A POLITICAL GENIUS! WHY SURRENDER?
Yes, if you really follow politics closely, it will be hard to listen and concede things. After all, wasn’t consuming all this political ammunition supposed to make you invincible in political debates? Your aunt is no match for you!
Look, I get it. I have been a political junkie for most of my life. I am pretty informed on a whole lot of things. (Heck, I even have a fantastic political podcast waiting patiently for an audience to discover it.)
Everyone in my extended family knows that I am a… high-information voter. And some find it odd that I am so non-combative among relatives. Yet I think they appreciate my style.
BUT, BUT, BUT… DO I EVER GET TO DEBATE PEOPLE?
Sure. In fact, at family things, I sometimes do. Here are my rules for engagement:
- I only get in debates with people with whom I agree on a lot of things. It isn’t widely known that productive disagreement is based on a foundation of agreement. Arguing with someone that shares none of your views is just quarreling. If you don’t think there is much racism in America, you can’t have a productive debate with someone who is upset about police brutality against non-whites. If you are a pacifist, you can’t debate military strategy in the Middle East.
- I debate people who treat political rivalries like sports rivalries. If you want a model for peaceful debate, watch two guys debate who is the best quarterback in football. There is passion and disagreement. There won’t be violence, or damage done to the friendship. For example, I know a few Democratic operatives whom I’d much rather debate than the average person. They don’t take things personally, they try to be witty instead of insulting, and they have enough experience to know that nobody has all the answers. Lastly on this, people who debate sports actually concede things, unlike in politics. A guy might say in the quarterback debate, “You know, you’re right, that was a great game he had.” How many times do you hear a political activist say about the other side, “You know, that senator really was right about that issue.” Never. That’s what’s wrong.
- I try to win on points, instead of going for the knockout. Lots of activists foolishly believe that they have one fantastic argument that can’t be countered. They always go for the knockout. This is bad strategy. I always seek to rack up minor wins and small concessions. In return, I often concede things on our side. My goal is that someone listening silently thinks, “I think Ed made some good points there.”
- I have to be willing to lose the argument. I only debate things I am willing to concede defeat on. I have no interest in debating things I hold dear. (What is the value in that? To educate people? I don’t do that inside of debates.) So if someone wants to debate whether or not a Republican can win the general presidential election, I’ll debate that, because I am not certain it’s possible. A Democrat I am arguing with will notice my uncertainly, and perhaps they will concede that Hillary Clinton isn’t guaranteed to win, either. That creates space for a genuine exchange of ideas.
Parting Thoughts
I love talking about politics, especially with non-political types. I view myself primarily as an ambassador for my views, not a gladiator. (A notable exception is political debate inside my political party. As a moderate, I fight some conservatives in a harsh way — but certainly not at family occasions.) But I am committed to not being a part of the left-right divide that is hurting America.
At Thanksgiving, I am especially grateful for being an American, and I am mindful of how our politics are hurting all of us. Anyone who I share dinner with is worthy of at least some respect for their views. I want Democrats to see me as a Republican they can talk to, especially when they know no other, which unfortunately is true for many I know.
Instead of banning politics at Thanksgiving, find a way to make it work. Hold onto your views, concede a lot, lose some arguments, and show the younger folks that there is another way.
