My best friend and I grew up in moderate-conservative households. While I became more progressive as I aged, she grew more conservative. In the past, we were able to have heated conversations and remain on good terms. Now I fear asking whom she voted for, suspecting that it was Trump. While I respect traditional Republican values, I believe Trump supporters are bad and selfish. My questions are: 1) Is it ethical to automatically characterize my friend as a bad and selfish person for potentially voting for him? And 2) Is it ethical to investigate whom my friend voted for just so I can get her to change her mind? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
Assuming that your friend did support Trump, you have no real idea why. Suppose she did so because she believed that democracy was in peril and wanted to protect it. You might think she was mistaken, but you couldn’t call that motive ignoble or selfish. We owe it to our friends not to believe ill of them without compelling evidence.
Now, you may think that someone who considered a vote for Trump to be a vote for democracy must not have been paying attention. You may think, further, that it’s wrong to do something as important as voting without due diligence. That is a kind of fault, but it’s not necessarily a result of selfishness. And I wonder whether you have any reason to assume that your friend was less diligent than many Democratic voters.
Finally, friends don’t ‘‘investigate’’ one another. If you have a question, ask it, and then listen. It’s at odds with the norms of friendship to have a conversation solely in order to change someone’s mind. In genuine conversation, we want to find out what our friends think and why they think it, because we care about them and their opinions. Even if you’re confident that nothing your friend says could change your view of Trump, you should certainly entertain the possibility that you will change your view of her.
A Bonus Question
My 20-year-old grandson voted for Trump, despite my attempts to help him understand the threat to democracy. (While I expressed my concerns, I respected his right to vote for the candidate of his choice and was proud that he voted in his first election.) My husband shared this information with his adult children — ours is a blended family — without getting my grandson’s consent or consulting me. His family, like us, aren’t Trump supporters. I’m struggling with this breach of privacy and disrespect for our marriage. — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
Having a secret ballot protects us from employers and other people with power over us, who might otherwise subject us to pressure or penalties. That’s why John Stuart Mill was wrong to oppose it. Still, he had a point to make: that every voter should consider the public good, and act as if under public scrutiny. I agree that your husband should have considered the possibility that your grandson believed that he was speaking to you in confidence. Still, you don’t indicate that your husband had reason to think this was the case. And there’s something to be said for the ideal of citizens who are willing to talk with one another about the issues and their views.
One thing you may discover when you spend time with people of the other party is that your stereotypes of them are mistaken. The political-science literature makes it plain that Republicans and Democrats have a wide range of views on many policy questions. You presumably fear that your grandson will face hostility from the rest of the family. (You don’t seem to fear that they will face hostility from him.) Losing the respect of family members is an affliction. But the right response is for him to explain to them why he thought his choice was the best one for the country. Reasonable people can come to respect other people’s choices even while disagreeing with them. You apparently believe that your stepchildren, having learned of your grandson’s vote, won’t be capable of being civil to him. I hope they’ll surprise you. If we can’t manage political civility in our families, how are we going to manage it in the republic that we, the people, share?
Readers Respond
Last week’s question was from a reader with an argument about treason. He wrote: “From my perspective, the attack on the Capitol spurred on by Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, the efforts to nullify the results of the 2020 election with false electors and unfounded court cases and the persistent effort to discredit those election results without evidence amounted to an attempt to overthrow a pillar of our democracy. More to the point, 18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 includes crimes against the nation described as treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or insurrection, seditious conspiracy and advocating the overthrow of government. I hold anyone voting for Trump at least morally guilty for the consequences of Jan. 6 and everything that follows the recent election. Would you agree that people who vote for Trump in light of these circumstances are themselves guilty of treasonous acts?”
In his response, the Ethicist noted: “Trump voters, for the most part, don’t think he committed treason. And your position can’t be that unknowingly voting for someone guilty of treason is itself treasonous. Perhaps you think that they should believe him to have been treasonous. … If voting for someone who has done bad things makes you guilty of them, most voters are in deep trouble. It’s easy to be inflamed by someone with a habit of making inflammatory statements. But there may be a cost when you deem those who vote for the other side as ‘‘the enemy from within.’’ That’s a term that Trump has freely employed, of course. You’ll want to ask yourself whether protecting democracy is best served by adopting this attitude.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
Dr. Appiah’s response is brilliant, or just plain wise, for seeing through the tangle of social and moral conundrums often raised by political issues. Bravo! — Lowell
⬥
The simplistic assertion that Trump supporters are guilty of his acts (criminal, treasonable or whatever) is both naïve and dangerous. For the record, I abhor the man and everything he stands for, but I accept that there are reasons people voted for him (some more valid than others). Why were the alternatives less attractive to Trump voters, and why do they feel the way they do? Addressing these questions is a far more positive way for any of us to bring about an America that is equitable, prosperous and democratic. — Tim
⬥
I don’t think Trump supporters should be considered traitors. A traitor has a specific intent to harm or damage some part of a government. Trump supporters truly believe that they are protecting the democracy rather than being a traitor to it. Rather, I think that most Trump supporters are traitors to themselves in that they have forgone (either consciously or unconsciously) the process of evaluating premises and actionable results. For whatever reason — be it laziness, comfort, blind faith, etc. — many Trump supporters look at the end goal (i.e. making America great again), and assume that the path to getting there is the right one. They’re drawing a valid conclusion from invalid assumptions. This is normal behavior for “cult” thinking, and is very appealing since it provides a direct path from discomfort (where, in their view, the world is today) to comfort (where they want to get). — John
⬥
I appreciate the Ethicist’s response to today’s question. My blood was boiling after I read the question because I am tired of people stereotyping Trump supporters. To suggest that voting for a particular candidate makes one guilty of treason is just that: treason. I realize that the letter writer quoted chapter and verse from the United States Code, and I can’t speak to that. I can say that we live in a country where we vote for the candidate we want to support without fear of retribution, and we do not have to reveal to others how we voted unless we choose to do so. In my opinion, using that information to charge someone for treason is simply wrong. If we are not allowed to vote freely, our voting privilege is threatened. I have had moral objections to the behavior of certain political candidates, but I realize that if someone supported that person, it does not mean that they too are morally objectionable. It means that everyone is different, and I cannot possibly understand everything about them. I hope that we as a nation can start to move forward in 2025. If we keep beating each other over the head, we won’t get anywhere worthwhile. — Elizabeth
⬥
The Ethicist’s response indulges in a familiar form of false equivalence: Both sides viewed the other party as antidemocratic, and voted accordingly. The real distinction is the irresponsible failure of Trump supporters to educate themselves in depth about the candidates and parties beyond the fictional universe of Fox News and its equivalents. In particular, Trump’s claim of widespread “electoral fraud” in 2020 was completely unsupported by evidence, yet it was widely accepted by most Republicans and a significant number of Independents. The result of such false beliefs was the worst instance of voter malpractice in U.S. history; voters should’ve known better after four years of Trump in office. Democracy relies on critical thinking and open inquiry by every voter, and failure to meet that responsibility leaves Trump voters in the position of sharing a degree of culpability for everything that will follow over the next four years. — Michael
⬥
I’m pleased that the Ethicist is taking on so many election-related questions. These are tricky but important. I was surprised by this sentence from the latest column: “And your position can’t be that unknowingly voting for someone guilty of treason is itself treasonous.” Why not? It’s reasonable to expect adults with agency to base their decisions on factual information. Especially when that information is readily available. (We all watched Jan. 6 unfold live on TV.) In a court of law, you won’t be found innocent if you didn’t know what you did was illegal — you’re expected to know. Ignorance can, however, be a mitigating circumstance. It should be the same here: Trump voters have behaved treasonously, but how exactly that reflects on them or what that means for social discourse is complicated. — Derek
⬥
I strongly disagree that Trump supporters should be considered guilty of treason. The problem is much larger than Trump — or either party, for that matter. As Noam Chomsky has said in recent interviews, the American empire is dying, something that is being widely discussed around the world, except of course in the United States. We are at the crossroads of a seismic change in our government, with climate change on an irreversible trajectory, the world on the verge of yet another global war — the list goes on. I think it’s time we stopped trying to demonize and prosecute one another and start listening and having conversations. Then, and only then, will we be able to fix our very broken government and convince people of the validity of a liberal agenda. Let’s stop blaming and hating and work now to create an all-inclusive movement. Eyes on the future (busy days ahead!) rather than past grievances (which will only further mire us in division and suspicion — the building blocks for an authoritarian regime). — Campbell
The post Is It Fair to Assume a Best Friend Is Bad and Selfish if She Supported Trump? appeared first on New York Times.
