Emotional Costs of Working to Overcome Divides: Reflections from the Builders Team

“Sometimes this work takes a real toll on my mental health — especially when I’m responding to highly negative comments.”
      — Shania Turner, Social Media Coordinator for Builders

Every day, we at Builders hear from people across the political spectrum. Most thank us for promoting understanding and better ways of engaging. But some accuse us of making false equivalencies, of being naive, or of secretly or unintentionally helping “the bad guys.”

We take all heartfelt criticism seriously. We reflect on criticism, wrestle with our own biases, and debate internally about how best to communicate. Sometimes, after spending hours on a post, we scrap it because it doesn’t feel right to us. Even when we disagree with specific criticism, it can be disheartening to see how negatively some people view our work. 

This work is not easy. It’s emotionally draining. At times, it can feel thankless. It can even strain our personal relationships. There are real emotional pains in trying to reduce political toxicity — and that’s probably why so few do it. 

Let’s talk some more about specific challenges…

No clear path

One hard thing about this work is that there’s no clear or proven path to follow. If there were an easy, known path, we wouldn’t see so much toxic conflict in the world. The truth is, we’re all figuring it out as we go. 

As we’ve written about before, even people who share the goal of reducing political toxicity and contempt will often disagree on what the problem is and how to tackle it. This makes the work messy and complicated. 

“There’s no roadmap for this work. We’re building it as we walk — and that means we won’t always get it right. We’re human, after all. That can be scary but I’d rather risk getting it wrong while trying to build something better than complain about the world’s problems without doing anything at all.”
        — Helen Ray, Senior Social Media Manager for Builders

Internal disagreement

“Depending on the post, some will label us right-wing or left-wing. Even members of our team question whether we’re leaning too far in one direction. It can feel like we’re doing mental gymnastics trying to keep everyone happy.”
         — Shania Turner, Social Media Coordinator for Builders

The Builders team includes people with different political views and different ways of thinking about our divides. This means that sometimes we’ll disagree about whether a particular piece of content — like a clip of a leader or activist talking — fits our values and aligns with this work. For one thing, there are so many different ways to interpret what people say — and our diverse political views can dramatically shift those interpretations. 

Or we’ll disagree about whether we should highlight someone’s good behavior if that person is seen as behaving quite toxically in the past. We err on the side of sharing positive behavior because we think this encourages more of the same from everyone, and because our sharing a positive moment from someone isn’t meant to imply we think that person always behaves in respectful ways. 

This is just to give you a sense of the challenges we wrestle with every day. Again, there is no clear path for this work, which often makes it tough intellectually and emotionally.

“We’re truly nonpartisan, and we work very hard to check our own biases — every single day. I’m not here to push an agenda. I’m here because real change starts when we talk, listen, and hold each other accountable.”
        —  Helen Ray, Senior Social Media Manager for Builders

Both-sides-ism and false equivalency

Some people on the left and right will think we’re being naive. We’ll often see messages like: “Don’t you all see the problem is all/mostly one group?” We’re often accused of false equivalency and “both-sides-ism” — the idea that by encouraging everyone to reflect on their role in toxic conflict, we’re claiming that “both sides are equally to blame” or “both sides are the same.” 

But this is a misunderstanding of what we’re doing. 

You can absolutely believe that one side is doing far more harm, and still believe that how you and “your side” respond matters.

In fact, we think that if we fail to speak persuasively to a wide swath of people — if we fail to speak to progressives and Trump supporters — then we’re not accomplishing much. 

Speaking only to one political group doesn’t help us reduce division; it will drive many people away. That’s why we push ourselves to speak persuasively to as many people as possible. We continue to believe that less toxic, more productive engagement is possible, no matter one’s political views and anger and fear. And we see evidence of that every day.

Accusations of hidden agendas

We also sometimes get accused of secretly working for “the right” or “the left” — of having a secret agenda. And we do understand why people can be suspicious of this work. These are tense times. Many people see their political opponents as causing real harm and posing major dangers. When you think that, it’s easy to think that anyone calling for more understanding and more dialogue must be naive and must not really “get it.” 

We do our best to meet those concerns with empathy — and to show that building bridges doesn’t mean ignoring harm or thinking “everything is fine.” 

Understanding views equating to defending those views

Some people mistake our appeals to understand various political perspectives as an attempt to defend them. We get it—when you strongly oppose something, even trying to understand where it comes from can feel uncomfortable or disloyal. But we believe striving for understanding while in conflict takes courage and strength; it is not weakness. If we want to build a less toxic and chaotic future, this is what we need more of. 

Polarization leads more and more of us to give up on understanding those people “over there,” which leads to increasing alienation and a self-reinforcing cycle. But you can understand why people believe what others do without agreeing with them — while still passionately disagreeing. (In fact, embracing empathy can help activists be more effective at achieving their political goals.)

Seeing us as defending Trump

The reactions we get to our work will often depend on who’s in power. With President Trump in office, most objections to this type of work will naturally come from progressive and anti-Trump people. Some incorrectly view our goal as defending Trump — as trying to reduce political passion and concern. If Harris had won, we’d see more objections from conservatives. (When your “side” wins, it’s easier to feel magnanimous and to want to take the “high road”.)

Again, we aren’t asking anyone to reserve judgment of their political opponents. Our stance is that how we engage with other people – more toxically versus less toxically — can affect the course of the conflict. We should also keep in mind that our views of our adversaries are often overly pessimistic. And people can allow their negative views of specific leaders to lead them to have contempt for the whole “other side.” When we aren’t careful, we can behave in ways that amplify the toxicity of the conflict — and unintentionally add to more division. 

In various ways, the toxicity of the conflict can be self-reinforcing. 

“A tough part of this work is responding to comments regarding human rights and other serious and important moral issues. We take the time to craft thoughtful replies. Still, sometimes it can be disheartening knowing that many will misunderstand our goals and that our responses are often not read in good faith.”
— Shania, Builders Social Media Coordinator

We need your help

The nature of polarization is that many politically passionate and concerned people will be skeptical of efforts like ours. Some will even think, “Your depolarization ideas are nice and all, but we need to focus our energy on beating the bad guys.”

But we believe that political passion and reducing toxicity can go hand in hand. In fact, we believe that the way we engage with others — especially those we disagree with — is part of the fight for a healthier, less chaotic, more functional, more thriving future, for all of us.

This work isn’t easy. It’s messy, exhausting, and sometimes feels thankless. But it’s also deeply needed. And we can’t do it alone. Please join us. 

“Despite the challenges, this is the most rewarding work I’ve done. It’s pushed me to build the mindset I need to engage meaningfully with people I don’t see eye to eye with — including my own mom. Our relationship gets better every day, and family members have come to me for advice on how to have more productive conversations. I didn’t see that coming. And then there’s the Builders community — showing up in the comments, modeling what this movement is all about. These are the things that keep me going.”
          —  Shania, Social Media Coordinator for Builders

“People are hungry for something different. There’s a real need for this work. And that’s what keeps me going, because I still believe a less polarized future is possible.”
          — Helen Ray, Senior Social Media Manager for Builders