Myth #1: Racism is an inherent personality trait.

Racist ideologies develop based on the environment in which individuals are raised. As race is a social construct, it is learned behavior. What one absorbs is influenced by their educators and their teachings, not by their intrinsic character.

The belief that those who harbor racist views are inherently bad stems from two sources. Firstly, it is deeply ingrained in human cognition. Social psychologists have noted that humans often fall prey to the Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE), which leads us to attribute others' negative actions to their character rather than their circumstances. When we claim that Trump supporters cannot shed their racial biases, we are framing their beliefs as a reflection of poor character instead of flawed social conditioning.

Secondly, the Civil Rights Movement significantly altered the perception of racial prejudice in America. Racism was once viewed as a set of ideologies and actions; now, it’s often seen as a personal moral failing. This shift is complex, but one interpretation is that once racism was recognized as a moral issue, it became incorrectly linked to an individual’s ethical character.

Myth #2: Prejudice is unchangeable.

The belief that prejudice cannot be altered is closely linked to the idea that racism is a fixed personality trait. If character is static and racism is rooted in character, then it follows that prejudice cannot change. Yet, as previously noted, racism is learned behavior, thus it can also be unlearned.

Numerous instances of individuals overcoming racial biases exist, with notable examples from initiatives like Life After Hate, the KKK Whisperer, and the transformation of Derek Black. Moreover, everyday examples of personal enlightenment regarding race occur frequently. In fact, the term “woke” has emerged to describe the process of increasing awareness regarding racial issues.

It’s tempting to dismiss individual transformation as atypical; however, over the last two decades, society has witnessed an unprecedented shift in prejudicial attitudes. At the beginning of this century, most Americans opposed gay marriage, yet now the majority supports it. This change has occurred within generations, suggesting that individuals of all ages have become more accepting over time.

If prejudice reflects our personal character rather than our environment, then the significant reduction in homophobia would imply a remarkable enhancement in the moral fabric of American society. Nevertheless, most would agree that we have not fundamentally changed for the better over the past twenty years. Therefore, something else must be influencing this transformation.

Myth #3: Calling people out is the most effective strategy against racism.

While calling people out can feel empowering and righteous, it is often ineffective.

The strategy of calling out derives its strength from shame and social exclusion. Historically, it served as a means of social control within small, tight-knit communities where an individual’s survival depended on acceptance. In that context, being ostracized could be dire.

In today’s world, however, this tactic has lost much of its efficacy. People can easily find alternative communities. If one group ostracizes an individual, they can simply seek acceptance elsewhere.

Moreover, some groups thrive on the rejection of others. When a Trump supporter is called out for their racism, they may find greater acceptance within the GOP. This is why extremist groups often target socially isolated individuals, recognizing that those who feel lonely are more likely to gravitate towards any group offering them a sense of belonging. Once they join such a group, their beliefs may shift accordingly.

Certainly, calling someone out can be effective in certain contexts, particularly when the individuals involved identify strongly with the ostracizing group and share its ideology. In essence, calling out works best when you are among like-minded individuals, but it may drive others further into their prejudiced beliefs.

# Alternative Approaches

Contrary to popular belief, there are numerous ways to combat prejudice. Research in social psychology identifies several interventions that can effectively enhance attitudes towards marginalized communities and decrease discrimination: fostering intergroup interactions, diversifying social circles, redefining group identities, and sharing media that cultivate empathy for others.

The most promising research on addressing prejudice involves political scientists exploring "deep canvassing," a new method employed by campaign organizations nationwide.

During deep canvassing, volunteers engage voters in brief, meaningful conversations aimed at persuasion rather than merely identifying supporters for future efforts. To witness deep canvassing in action, check out the video below.

Groundbreaking research on deep canvassing has shown that a ten-minute conversation with a stranger can effectively reduce transphobia for up to three months. More recent studies have found that similarly short discussions can diminish exclusionary attitudes towards immigrants and transgender individuals for four months.

# Implications for You

If a stranger knocking on a random voter’s door can significantly reduce prejudice through a mere ten-minute dialogue, surely you can also influence the racial biases of those in your life. If you haven’t succeeded yet, it’s not due to an inability to effect change, but rather because you might not be trying effectively.

Political psychologists are only beginning to decipher the elements necessary for combating prejudice through conversation. Although the complete picture is not yet clear, five essential components seem to emerge.

1. Unconditional positive regard

Therapists, educators, and caregivers excel at fostering change because they provide unwavering support, regardless of one’s beliefs or actions. Embracing new perspectives can be daunting, and having someone in your corner can make a significant difference.

2. Asking questions

To engage someone in a transformative conversation, avoid lecturing them about your beliefs. Instead, inquire about their thoughts. This not only shows that you genuinely care but also encourages them to explore their own beliefs, helping them identify inconsistencies that may prompt change.

3. Listening and reflecting

Listening is not merely about formulating a response; it's about truly understanding what the other person conveys. To impact their thoughts, summarize their points so they know they’ve been heard. When individuals feel acknowledged, it opens them up to reconsider their views.

4. Perspective taking

Often, we are confined by our own experiences. To combat prejudice, it’s vital to adopt alternative viewpoints. Conversations that encourage empathy across differences can be incredibly powerful. For instance, asking, “What do you think it feels like to be a Black person in America?” can profoundly shift someone’s perspective.

5. Storytelling

Despite what one might have learned in school, the human brain responds more to stories than to organized facts and data. Emotional and intellectual persuasion often stems from narratives. To challenge someone’s prejudices, share personal experiences of discrimination, whether yours or someone else’s.

Implement these five strategies in your next discussion with those you perceive as “fascist white supremacists.” You may be surprised by the outcomes.

For more structured guidance on addressing racial prejudice through conversation, I highly recommend the White Ally Toolkit by my colleague, Dr. David Campt (david campt).

# The Responsibility is Yours

The pertinent question now is not whether you can influence the racial biases of Trump supporters, but rather when you will take action.

The greatest obstacle to progress in the battle against racism isn’t the racists themselves—it’s those who have chosen to abandon hope.

# About the Author

Dr. Karin Tamerius is a former psychiatrist with a focus on the intersection of psychology and politics. She founded Smart Politics, a nonprofit organization dedicated to teaching progressives effective communication strategies across the political spectrum. Dr. Tamerius is also known for her work as the creator of the Angry Uncle Bot featured in the New York Times.