This 2016 election cycle has made me realize one huge thing about my life in this country: I have very little in common with a large chunk of the people living in America.

I have to believe that most Americans are not hoping for our country to get worse, yet we disagree so fundamentally (and seemingly irreconcilably) on certain social issues that it’s hard to see how a reasonable person who you can otherwise coexist with could possibly hold to their “abhorrent” beliefs.

So, in the midst of some highly divisive politics, I’m trying to at least understand the convictions of those Americans I disagree with. It sucks that this is so hard to do. It sucks even more that our tough national conversations don’t start with an earnest effort at empathy. We could at least try.

I’ll start with gun control. Should be easy enough.

I really struggle to understand why people resist all efforts to reduce the number of gun deaths by increasing the safety measures around access to guns. I’ve listened to many arguments, but they just don’t hit home with me. I don’t think lethal weapons are the best form of self-defense. I don’t buy that citizens with guns will help neutralize or prevent active shooters. I don’t own a gun, so I don’t worry about the government taking my guns away.

And that’s part of the problem. I have no personal experience in this arena. Aside from holstered sidearms on police officers, I’m not even sure if I’ve seen a gun in person. How can I possibly understand the concerns of gun owners?

No problem is unsolvable. We just need to frame the issue in terms we understand, then we can map back to the original. Textbook computer science thinking.

Gun control is Internet regulation.

Imagine if the leader of our country was publicly advocating drastically increased regulation of the internet. It is too much of a risk to continue leaving the entire Internet open to use by our enemies. Terrorists are radicalizing people in our country without setting foot on our soil via social media, and the government can do nothing to stop it.

We must start introducing protective measures. The Internet will still be available, but people known to traffic suspicious sites will not be allowed to sign service contracts with ISPs. Heavy duty stuff like encryption isn’t at all necessary for recreational browsing, so there’s no reason for the general public to have access to it. And it is flat-out dangerous for every citizen to have the ability to create their own private website or web server - they could do anything with it.

Next stop: 1984

If you share much of my point of view, it was stupid-obvious that that’s how fascism gets started in every dystopian future you can imagine.

It would be absolutely alarming to me if the country started embracing ideas like that, and I would fear for the future of our society. A bit dramatic, but still true.

Now, I wouldn’t claim that this is a perfect mapping. But I do feel like I can at least see the common ground, and can releate to the source of certain fears.

I still believe the country would be safer if there were fewer guns, and I believe we should be willing to make personal sacrifices in order to make America safer. But I’ll have a bit more patience with the people who have different perspectives.