How to discuss politics civilly around the dinner table

Talking politics is no easy task. According to a 2018 study by the Pew Research Center, 53% of Americans said talking about political issues with those they disagree with is “generally stressful and frustrating.”

Before the winter break, Utah State University students and faculty expressed their thoughts on political discussions — mainly, how to remain civil during such conversations. 

Gracie Jo Averett, a USU senior majoring in journalism and political science, explained how she stays polite during political discussions. 

“My main thing is putting myself in their shoes — like, obviously there’s a reason why they’re saying the things that they are,” Averett said. 

According to Jeannie Johnson, the director of USU’s Center for Anticipatory Intelligence (CAI) and associate professor of political science, working towards a common goal and value in the conversation can also help. 

“One of the things we emphasize in our courses within the Center for Anticipatory Intelligence, sort of our highest compliment to students, is that they are bridge builders,” she said. 

Johnson said students and people in general can ask themselves questions to determine if they are being bridge builders.

“Where are you building bridges between communities? Where are you pausing to listen longer than you talk? Where are you recognizing where your preferred policy outcomes would impose really sharp trade-offs on another group of people who maybe you hadn’t come to know yet?” Johnson said. 

However, sometimes working with those that simply want to be belligerent in their debates can be a different matter, according to Johnson. 

She said having a conversation with someone who wants to seek to solve problems is “a completely different scenario than the relative who comes screaming across the room.”

“I can just see in their body language — they want to do combat,” Johnson said. “Those are not conversations worth having.”

Liberty Warren, a USU student, said the best way to deal with political debates is sometimes to leave the conversation. 

“If it feels like the other person is very stuck in their ways and just wants to change their opinion, I would just kind of, you know, basically ease out of the conversation at that point, because you’re not going to get anywhere,” Warren said. 

According to Averett, another way to de-escalate situations is to have open, question-filled dialogue. 

“I say like, ‘Oh, hey, I’m really interested in why you think that; do you mind explaining it to me?’ So just having a polite conversation is one thing I do, or else just asking them why,” Averett said. 

Belligerent conversations around the dinner table sometimes become less about politics and more about conspiracies, according to Johnson. When loved ones get entrenched in a conspiracy theory, it will take more than proving them wrong with information.

“People come to me for facts; they want information and data that they can present to their family members and show them how this conspiracy theory is not real,” Johnson said. “None of that will work.”

Conspiracy theorists will often be drawn to a community that provides them with exclusive and oversimplified information — information that will lead to not just their beliefs, but to a “core of their identity.”

Getting out of a conspiracy theory, she said, may be an identity crisis for the family member. Presenting information that would cause any doubt will lead to a fear of that identity crisis, just entrenching them deeper. 

“When possible, sometimes it’s better to let it sort of die out on its own, so it can be something that we just don’t talk about anymore. In other cases, they will require professional help and a really supportive community around them to get out,” Johnson said.

-Jenny.Carpenter@usu.edu

Featured photo illustration by Bailey Rigby