When Disagreement Becomes Dehumanization

Recently, a photo circulated of John Sculley, now 86, with his wife at Mar-a-Lago—posted without commentary, policy advocacy, or provocation. What followed in the comments, many from former colleagues at Apple dating back to the 1980s, was striking.

Not disagreement.

Not thoughtful critique.

But contempt.

Words like “disgusting,” “creepy,” “unconscionable,” and worse, aimed not at an idea but at a person.

This is just one example. Similar reactions now occur routinely when high-profile individuals are photographed with people others dislike or politically oppose—at conferences, dinners, weddings, sporting events, or public gatherings. A single image, stripped of context, is often enough to trigger outrage.

Disagreement Is Not the Problem

Healthy societies disagree. Strong organizations disagree. Innovation depends on it.

But what we’re increasingly seeing isn’t disagreement - it’s moralized contempt. A mindset where:

  • Association becomes guilt

  • Presence becomes endorsement

  • Curiosity becomes betrayal

Once that line is crossed, conversation ends. Judgment takes over.

When Politics Becomes Identity

For many, Donald Trump is no longer simply a political figure—he’s a symbol. And when politics becomes identity, everything turns binary:

  • With us or against us

  • Acceptable or exiled

  • Virtuous or corrupt

There’s no room left for nuance, personal history, or basic human dignity.

Ironically, this reaction often comes from communities that once prized independent thinking and resisted conformity. Today, social pressure increasingly enforces a different orthodoxy—one where deviation is punished publicly.

When Virtue Signaling Replaces Character

What’s especially troubling is how often public shaming masquerades as moral courage.

Many of these reactions are not about persuasion or principle. They are performative—a way of signaling belonging:

“I’m on the right side. Don’t mistake me for them.”

The need to belong is deeply human. But when belonging requires humiliation of others, civility becomes expendable.

At that point:

  • Moral signaling matters more than moral behavior

  • Group approval matters more than individual dignity

  • Public condemnation becomes currency

The cost, however, is always borne by someone else.

Public Shaming Shrinks Influence

There’s a consequence to this that’s often overlooked: public shaming collapses one’s own platform.

We’ve seen prominent cultural figures choose repeated public humiliation of those they disagree with—mocking, labeling, and dismissing entire groups of people. Over time, they didn’t persuade. They lost half their audience.

Not because people changed their values—but because no one listens to someone who openly despises them.

Influence erodes quietly. People disengage. Silence replaces dialogue.

A Different Model of Leadership

By contrast, figures like Matthew McConaughey have taken a different path.

He speaks openly about division.

He acknowledges complexity.

He resists the urge to shame those he disagrees with.

As a result, people across the spectrum may not agree with him—but they still listen. His influence expanded because he treated disagreement as something to navigate, not weaponize.

Even Those Known for Retaliation Face the Restraint Test

President Trump has often said that he “hits back.” That framing resonates with people who feel attacked or dismissed—and helps explain why some interpret his style as strength.

But even there, a distinction matters.

Over time, he too has shown moments - sometimes strategic, sometimes learned - where restraint mattered more than reaction. Not silence. Not surrender. Restraint.

Responding forcefully is not the same as responding impulsively. Without restraint, reach narrows. Influence hardens into loyalty from only one side.

Emotional Intelligence Is a Practice, Not a Label

Knowing how and when to respond is not instinctive. It’s a skill.

Emotional intelligence isn’t about suppressing emotion. It’s about recognizing it early and choosing a response that doesn’t create unnecessary harm.

That requires:

  • Awareness of emotional triggers

  • The ability to pause instead of perform

  • Discernment about whether speaking adds value—or just noise

And like any skill, emotional intelligence decays when it isn’t practiced.

Civility Is a Choice

Civility doesn’t happen by accident. It isn’t a personality trait, a political position, or a generational value.

It is a choice.

A choice made in every interaction.

Every conversation.

Every comment—online and in person.

We don’t change culture through outrage or shaming. We change it through consistent, intentional behavior, especially when emotions are high and disagreement is real.

Choosing civility doesn’t mean avoiding hard topics. It means engaging them without abandoning our humanity—or someone else’s.

That choice, repeated daily, is how trust is rebuilt.

It’s how influence is preserved.

And it’s how we change for the better.

Related CivilTalk Blog Post - When Influence Requires Restraint: The New Leadership Standard for Everyone — CT

Next
Next

From Apple to Civiltalk: A Founder’s Journey to Ensure Technology Serves Humanity