Reflection

As I said in my previous blog post, interviewing Mike was an absolute pleasure and an eye-opening experience. My empathy walls were demolished as I got to know Mike better. I am really grateful to him for taking the time to be interviewed and being open and honest about his beliefs. This blog post will be focusing on the ways that I was able to come to a better understanding of the Republican party, and to become a more accepting person though the fieldwork I had the privilege to carry out.

There were a lot of assumptions I had going into this quarter-long journey about Mike and the Republican party in general. For example, I assumed that Mike was Republican because almost everyone in his area of residence (the Salt Lake Valley) is, and that he had been continually indoctrinated with the ideals of the Republican platform since his early childhood. I also had the related assumption that he was Republican because he wasn’t educated about political issues, because surveys show that more educated people tend to be liberal. I was wrong on all of those accounts. I came to find out that he had lots of pressure from his family, primarily his grandmother, to become a democrat. He also was nearly convinced to veer left because of a political science professor he had in college. Mike did enormous amounts of research and reflection during his early life to determine where he stood on the political spectrum. He still studies the Constitution often, and he considers it to be the keystone of his political views.

I think the most powerful assumption I had was that he was simply wrong to think the way he does. This preconceived notion I had was handily eliminated. His explanations of the Constitution actually made perfect sense to me. I could see exactly why he isn’t a fan of a strong federal government: the Constitution doesn’t expressly give the federal government nearly as much power as they have now. I found that most of his arguments were sound and were a lifetime in the making.

That said, I definitely saw the great paradox pop up now and again in his thinking. In our most recent interview, he even acknowledged one of the contradictions that were present in his thinking. Despite numerous financial struggles, Mike has never turned to the government for assistance. He is on social security though. As he was talking about the illegal nature of assistance programs fueled by the federal government, he said “I probably shouldn’t say this because I’m on social security, but social security is illegal because the Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to create programs like that.” So he reaps the benefits of a governmental program, but he is opposed to that very program. The Salt Lake Valley is also notorious for being an extremely polluted area in the winter, but he does not vote for government officials that will help clean up the area that he has resided for all his life. I think the biggest paradox of all has to do with his support for President Trump. As I interviewed Mike, it became very clear to me that his political views are morally based. If Mike has such high moral standards, how could he support a man who publicly disrespects women and has proven to be rather racist? Trump isn’t exactly the most morally straight guy I know of. I find it to be rather contradictory that Mike places such great emphasis on the morality or immorality of political issues, but can vote for someone like Trump.

As I conducted my fieldwork, I found that we agreed on quite a few core principles. For example, one of the main things Mike discussed with me was how divided this country is. I completely agree that this country is hazardously divided, and we both share a conviction that we need to address this division if we hope for this country to survive. He believes that immigration is important for the economy and for the cultural enrichment of our country. I completely agree; the difference in our thinking is not about the importance of immigration, but the manner in which people immigrate. I think that if we all just stopped and took a second to find common ground instead of fighting each other for our differences, we would find that we have a lot more in common with each other than we might realize.

I think the most important thing I will take away from this experience is Mike’s example of how to connect across difference. His two best friends are staunch democrats, but he has a great relationship with each of them. Their political difference actually strengthens their friendship because they are continually showing support for one another even though their beliefs are different. It is easy to accept people that think and act the same as you. Every one does that. The difficult task is to learn how to accept people that are different from us. That is what this country needs. I think we would do well to follow after Mike’s example. It was an honor to do this assignment with Mike as my subject, and I think that this experience will help me seek to understand other people that are different than me in every facet of life.