Op-ed | From Fighting Hate to a Beloved Davis Community

“Don’t think of a hateful elephant “

By Alan “Lorax” Hirsch

“Love is the only force powerful enough to turn an enemy into a friend” M.L. King Jr.

Next week, the Davis Hate Free Together program will hold an all-day strategic summit to evaluate its progress and plan its future direction. This collaborative effort—originating from the City of Davis, UC Davis, and Yolo County—was created to address bigotry and prejudice toward individuals based on identity (e.g., being gay, Black, Hispanic, or Jewish).
However, the program now needs to evolve beyond addressing individual prejudice and begin tackling the deeper and more complex challenge of intergroup conflict.

UC Davis is currently under intense pressure from the Trump administration to dismantle its diversity programs and respond to what has been labeled an “epidemic of hate” focused on one group: Jews. This new directive highlights the limitations—and potential harms—of the Hate Free Together framing. Not only may it be ineffective, but it might also worsen group conflict.

More fundamentally, the “Hate Free Together” name contradicts well-established findings in cognitive science about how the human mind works. If I tell you, “Don’t think of an elephant,” you will, of course, think of an elephant. Similarly, if a government tells people, “Don’t hate those other people,” the instruction likely backfire. Talking about the Holocaust has not ended antisemitism.

The program also treats hate, prejudice, and bigotry as if they were medical conditions rather than social or psychological phenomena. But tribalism is something all humans are susceptible to, especially under certain environmental and cultural pressures.

The choice of this “don’t think about hate” framing was likely unintentional. The “Hate Free Together” branding emerged in 2022, created by a PR team that had just completed success of the Healthy Davis Together COVID testing initiative. Indeed, the http://www.HateFreeTogether.org website literally describes hate as a virus, setting a goal of “total eradication”—implying the new program will function like a vaccine.

But when hate exists at the group level, this disease/victim metaphor sets the stage for a dangerous contest: Who will be politically defined as the viral “haters,” and who as the innocent helpless patient “victims”? This dynamic incentivizes groups to highlight their own trauma and victimhood while blaming others—rather than taking responsibility for building a safe, welcoming, and pluralistic community. There is even an incentive to traumatize one’s own people: stoking fear in your group is a well-known political tool. This is not “victim blaming” (again, who is the victim?) but a reminder that the tactics “victims” choose matter too.

Examples of Zero-Sum “Hate Free” Framing

The polarization we see in the country lends itself to a “hate eradication” model. All nuance is lost if you are declared a victimizer—this reductionist framing is dehumanizing. Those labeled as “victimizers” are said to have a “derangement syndrome.” If you are labeled a “victim,” your claims of “moral clarity” will be valorized, not questioned as zealotry.

Many national Republican leaders now use the “hate eradication” framing to describe their conflict with Democrats (see videos of Speaker od House Michael John & others) This rhetoric has a local impact: Indivisible’s “No Kings” Rally on Saturday, October 18, is being framed as a “Hate American/Pro-Hamas/Pro-Antifa” event, and local Yolo grassroots leaders may consequently be viewed as extremists or even terrorists America-Haters allied with Hamas. Democrats are now said to holding America “hostage” in a government shut down to protect ObamaCare. This stays with the metaphor, and we know the solution for Hamas was total eradication of those haters.

Closer to home, the ongoing conflict in Davis between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel communities over U.S. taxpayer support for the Gaza war clearly illustrates the need to rethink this dichotomous framing, as both groups carry generational trauma.

In retrospect, we can see this black-and-white framing in the Human Relations Commission’s handling of the MAPA report and the community’s reaction to it (full disclosure: I admit I was part of this dynamic too). Falling into a zero-sum “Hate Free” metaphor, neither side in the MAPA controversy (the HRC and its pro-Palestinian allies vs. the Jewish community) showed introspection about how their actions were increasing friction and distrust within the community. Their behavior made the opposing group feel more vulnerable, threatened, and reactive.

There is an urgent need to avoid polarization if we want to preserve our pluralistic society at a time when civil rights are under threat. The great danger is that if one group “wins” the political argument and is declared the victim, the opposing group—now branded as “haters”—could be censored, marginalized, or even face deportation through state power.

A Better Way: Talk about Beloved Community

To stop thinking of that polarizing elephant (hate), we need new language to reshape a shared reality we can all value—one that sees conflict as a potential source of growth rather than destruction.

I urge the Hate Free Together (HFT) program to rebrand, rename, and reframe itself—moving toward a more positive foundation rooted in the spirit of “we-ness” found in the Principles of One Community This should be easy, as these principles are already embraced by UC Davis, the City of Davis, and DJUSD.

The HFT project’s past focus has leaned heavily on “group pride” activities that emphasize differences and historical grievances. What’s missing is a focus on what unites us.

Instead, there should be more multicultural events and intergroup forums that build bridges and foster shared understanding. Rather than merely celebrating identity, the goal should be to cultivate curiosity and empathy and build one-on-one connections across lines of difference.

We should also avoid setting ourselves up for failure through the disease-metaphor promise of “eliminating the virus” of conflict—especially when many conflicts originate outside Davis. Instead, we should teach techniques of dialogue and set guardrails for civil discourse that have been lost at the national level. We need to learn to argue better. There are, in fact, many models for holding disagreement from the Israel/Palestine context that could be adapted for Davis. The HFT program could bring them here to train local leaders in their use.

I especially recommend that this attitude shift incorporate the language and vision of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Beloved Community”—a concept he championed even while confronting the deep injustices of apartheid in the American South during the 1960s. This vision promotes pluralism and shared values: creating a safe, just, and inclusive community for all—one where grace and repair are the norm.

Alan ‘Lorax” Hirsch can be seen handing out “Love your Neighbor- no exceptions” lawn signs in the Saturday Davis farmer’s market.

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Tags: