Why Good People Vote in Ways You Hate
Author’s Note: While I am not a political expert, Jonathan Haidt’s research offers a lens to understand voting behavior—not just globally, but in the heart of our own barangays, family dinners, and online debates. Focusing on his work, "Why Do They Vote That Way?" from The Righteous Mind, let’s explore how moral wiring shapes elections.
The Great Divide
We live in a deeply divided era.
From heated debates about traditional values versus progressive reforms, to passionate arguments about economic policies and leadership styles.
Our politics has become so polarized that we often find ourselves asking: "How could anyone possibly think that way?"
We struggle to understand our fellow countrymen across the political aisle, assuming they must be misguided, uninformed, or perhaps even malicious.
But what if there's a deeper truth?
What if our political differences in the Philippines (or anywhere, for that matter) aren't about who's right or wrong, but about how we're wired differently at a fundamental level?
Jonathan Haidt's work in "The Righteous Mind" reveals something profound: our political orientations and choices of votes aren't merely rational choices.
They're expressions of our moral foundations or the deep intuitions that shape how we see the world.
Understanding these foundations offers us not just an explanation for our divided politics but an avenue for more constructive dialogue with fellow Filipinos who hold opposing political views.
The Elephant In Our Head
Human moral judgments are primarily driven by intuition rather than reason.
Haidt uses the metaphor of the "elephant and rider" to illustrate this:
The elephant represents our intuition (automatic, emotional responses)
The rider symbolizes our reasoning (justifications we create after our intuitive decisions).
We like to believe our positions on politics come from careful thinking and analysis. The surprising truth?
Our intuitions come first, and our reasoning follows to justify what we already feel.
This explains why facts and logical arguments don’t always change minds during electoral debates.
When your neighbor votes for a candidate you oppose, they're not ignoring reality.
Rather, they're responding to a different set of moral intuitions that lead them to interpret that reality differently.
When we debate politics at family reunions or on social media, we're not just exchanging ideas—we're defending intuitions that feel fundamentally true to us.
This doesn't mean facts don't matter in Philippine politics (they do), but it does mean that true persuasion requires engaging with underlying moral intuitions, not just presenting better arguments.
The Six Moral Foundations
Haidt's research identified six primary moral foundations that influence how we vote:
Care/Harm: Sensitivity to others' suffering and protection of the vulnerable—malasakit e.g. Advocating for better healthcare and indigent support.
Fairness/Cheating: Commitment to equality and justice—katarungan e.g. Outrage over corruption.
Liberty/Oppression: Resistance to domination and restrictions on freedom—kalayaan e.g. Protests against government overreach.
Loyalty/Betrayal: Standing with your tribe, family, or nation—pagkakaisa e.g. Voting for hometown candidates.
Authority/Subversion: Respect for tradition and legitimate leadership—paggalang e.g. Support for traditional leaders.
Sanctity/Degradation: Concern for purity and avoiding contamination—kabanalan e.g. Opposition to divorce or abortion.
Here's the fascinating part: progressive and conservative voters prioritize these foundations differently.
Progressive voters tend to emphasize care, fairness, and liberty (1 to 3); the values we see championed in social justice movements and calls for equality.
Conservative voters value all six foundations more equally, placing greater importance on loyalty, authority, and sanctity (4 to 6); these values we see expressed in appeals to traditional Filipino family structures, respect for established institutions, and religious values.
Understanding The Political Divide
This variation explains why political discussions in the Philippines, or politics in general, often feel like we're speaking different languages.
When progressive voters advocate for expanded social welfare programs, they're speaking from care.
When conservative voters oppose them, they may be concerned about authority (government overreach) or fairness (getting what you earn).
Both sides express sincere moral concerns that are deeply rooted in values, just different ones.
This perspective allows us to stop seeing our political opponents as morally deficient or outright misinformed.
Instead, we can recognize that they have a different moral compasses—a different way of weighing various values that are all part of our shared experiences.
This doesn't mean all political positions are equally valid, but it does mean approaching political differences with more humility and curiosity.
Most Filipinos across the political spectrum are morally motivated. They aren't voting based on selfishness or ignorance.
Voters are voting based on sincere moral concerns that matter deeply to them and to their vision of what the Philippines, or the world, should be.
Finding Common Ground
How can understanding these moral foundations change our approach to local elections?
Firstly, it helps us recognize that voters who don’t share our views aren't necessarily immoral—they're operating from a different moral matrix.
The conservative concern for traditional Filipino values isn't simply fear of change; it's an expression of the authority and sanctity foundations.
The progressive push for community programs isn't just idealism; it's an expression of the care foundation.
Further, it suggests more effective ways to communicate across the political divide in our communities.
Want to persuade someone who prioritizes different moral foundations? Frame your argument to address their values, not just your own.
For example, a proposal for environmental protection in your municipality might be framed around sanctity ("preserving our natural heritage") to resonate with conservative Filipinos, rather than solely around preventing harm.
A proposal for strengthening local police might appeal to progressives when framed around protecting the vulnerable, not just maintaining order.
The Humility Challenge
This understanding challenges us to move beyond the "self-righteous" behavior that often characterizes political discourse.
Self-righteousness: the quality of believing that your ideas and behaviour are morally better than those of other people — Cambridge Dictionary
The absolute conviction that I am right and you are wrong feels good, but it blinds us to others' legitimate arguments and concerns.
What if we're all partially right?
What if different moral foundations evolved to address different social challenges, and a complete moral perspective requires all of them?
Despite our differences, we do share common moral concerns as human beings with the right to vote.
Both progressive and conservative voters care about fairness, though they may define it differently.
Both value liberty, though they may see different threats to it.
By focusing on these shared foundations, we can begin to bridge the divide in our communities.
Conclusion
Understanding why people vote the way they do doesn't require abandoning our own convictions.
But it does invite us to approach politics with more empathy and less certainty and judgement.
Our political views aren't just rational conclusions, they're expressions of our deepest moral intuitions driven by emotions and uncontrollable biases.
The next time you find yourself baffled by how your aunties and uncles could vote for "that candidate" during election year, remember that they're likely following their moral intuitions just as you follow yours.
By understanding why people vote the way they do in our local elections, we take the first step toward building stronger communities, ones where difference doesn't have to mean division.
We each believe in our own moral codes with same levels of sincerity as you, the one reading this article.
This isn't just about politics—it's about recognizing our common humanity and shared national identity across the political divide.
