Election 2024

On November 5th, people would have cast their ballots, and then the tally begins. Some vote for Kamala Harris, some for Donald Trump. Others may find themselves leaning towards Jill Stein, Cornel West, Chase Oliver, Claudia De la Cruz, or a write-in candidate they are partial to. Others still may find themselves abstaining from the process for lack of a candidate they are drawn to, or at the very least voting "uncommitted,” so their participation is a data point to be referenced.?

You are well within your right as a member of this nation to take any of those paths; all are legitimate forms of political participation that live up to the spirit of the democratic process. Yes, even the uncommitted, even those choosing to, as an informed individual, not vote for lack of a candidate, they find themselves being able to cast a ballot for. Controversial as that might be, informed abstinence is a legitimate form of political participation with a historical lineage of resistance efforts tied to it. I give credence to those who find this particular aspect of political participation challenging due to the privilege it is to vote in this nation when in many others a vote is not guaranteed. The reality is that wherever you find a democracy, you will find within the history of the democracy those who abstain from ballot procedures as an informed member of the public as an effort to resist the inability of the democratic process to provide for them what they find fair, reasonable, and just options. Please consider the following excerpt from el-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz, Malcolm X, not as a totalization of his speech but rather a glimpse into the nuanced nature in which some communities may choose to participate in the democratic process of this country.

The political philosophy of black nationalism means that the black man should control the politics and the politicians in his own community; no more. The black man in the black community has to be re-educated into the science of politics so he will know what politics is supposed to bring him in return. Don't be throwing out any ballots. A ballot is like a bullet. You don't throw your ballots until you see a target, and if that target is not within your reach, keep your ballot in your pocket.

The Ballot or the Bullet by el-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz, Malcolm X, April 3, 1964 Cleveland, Ohio

There is a popular saying amongst the legal crowd. “Reasonable minds can differ.” Well, it is true. Two people of rational, sound mind who presented all the same facts, agreeing upon the reality of the situation in front of them, are within their reason to differ on the conclusions they draw. To me, this is a step beyond simply agreeing to disagree. Agreeing to disagree carries an air lacking resolution, which I think improperly captures the complexity of people differing on the conclusions they draw. Agreeing to disagree donates to me a finality far too assured in a world ever so changing. Instead, when reasonable minds differ, a notion of futurity is palatable in how each individual imagines the present impacting what is to come. Similarly to how two reasonable minds can choose different ways through which they would like to engage in the political process, two reasonable minds can arrive at different candidates for whom to vote. When reasonable minds differ, a notion of futurity is palatable in how each individual imagines the present impacting what is to come.??

I think for me this is where there is a deep reflection, one that I am comfortable not having finished. Generally, as these elections go, about half the nation shows up to vote during presidential elections. Of the half of the country that goes to vote, half go one way, half go another way. These are rough estimates, and on both scales it goes a little over half and a little under half, turnout and candidate split, respectively. Whatever place you find yourself, voting, not voting, voting for a candidate big or small, you are in a relative minority of eligible voting-age people.??

What I have personally seen is more than a departure from agreeing to disagree. I have seen people, in my lifetime, be unable to accept the reality that reasonable minds can differ. It is easy to write off those who have not arrived at the same conclusion as you as not having all the facts, being ill informed, falling victim to misinformation, or just being flat out uneducated and wrong. It probably makes us feel warm and fuzzy inside; self-righteousness can be a drug.

It is harder, much harder, significantly harder, to accept the reality that someone can be just as educated, well informed, well ready, and abreast of all the facts as you are and arrive at a different conclusion. On the one hand, it challenges our beliefs by planting the seed that we ourselves may have arrived at the “wrong” conclusion. On the other hand, it blows up the whole self-righteousness that makes us feel warm and fuzzy inside for doing the right thing. If the mind differing from me is a reasonable mind, it challenges the notion (in a diametrically opposed point of view) that I am maybe the unreasonable actor in this situation. Whether you look at it intellectually or emotionally, it is understandable why reasonable minds being able to differ is difficult. It challenges people at their very core.?

Moreover, this is contingent upon the notion that we are even having conversations across the proverbial aisle, which we know is happening less and less in our lifetime as echo chambers in real life and the digital world are on the rise.

If you’re wondering what exactly is the point of what I’ve said thus far, then you and I are in the same place. At the end of the day, this stream of consciousness before the 4-year national ritual before us is not a call to action for any group of people. The purpose of my writing is unrealized unless it has an impact on the reader to reflect and pause on how they interact with those who may have arrived at a different conclusion than them.

For many, a sign of high intelligence is being able to be right about things. Honestly, personally, I do not care much for that form of intelligence. It is nice, sure, but individualistic and self-centered in nature. I am preferential to the type of intelligence that comes from the resilience to engage in difficult conversations with those like and unlike us towards building connection and community. At the end of the day, the nation agrees on more issues that impact the day-to-day of our lives than we disagree. Moving issues forward and being able to come to resolutions should not be held up on the parts we disagree on when the parts we agree on are so vast and incredibly impactful to our material conditions.?

This is something I try my hardest to practice in all aspects of my life, and it has endeared me to peers and colleagues who otherwise I might not have connected with. When I am seen with some of my closest professional colleagues, people often wonder how we connected or what common ground we share. In short, empathy. We listen to one another, we talk, we connect, we share stories of how we arrived at our current outlooks, we have the courage to be wrong, and we have the bravery to build new relationships from uncommon places. I cherish those relationships deeply and look to build more over time, as the authenticity cannot be sold short.?

Again, whatever decision you make with your ballot, make it in good conscience, and be willing to engage with others who do the same. As I do, as you can, as we all can. If each of us starts from there and carries more patience, empathy, and care, we might be surprised at where we can go.