Contempt is the sulfuric acid of love. Dr. John Gottman, relationship expert
“How did this happen? I just don’t understand.” That’s what I’m hearing from a lot of folks around the election results. Well, I have some insight. It comes from my roots in Tennessee. The problem is one we all vigorously dislike…snootiness. It's waaaay bad for all our relationships.
Over fifty years ago I took John to my home in Appalachia. He was worried. He’d seen that nightmarish movie with the dueling banjos starring Jon Voigt, Deliverance.
Well, John bravely embraced the "hollers" and backwoods and loved the people who lived there. He still does. And they liked him. John is a naturally un-snooty guy.
At one point my uncle was watching John rolling around on the grass and playing with a mutt. My uncle said, “Well, June, you got yourself a good man. He’s just a down home, good ole boy.”
This endorsement was big because the East Tennesseans where my uncle and father grew up, Bean Station, kept a close eye on outsiders. Why? Because outsiders can be snooty know-it-alls, arrogant, pretentious, and think they’re better than others.
In my family it was perfectly fine to be well educated (highly encouraged by my parents) and having money was fine too. But if either led to putting on airs and being snooty, you were socially ostracized and gossiped about. "Doesn't he put his pants on one leg at a time just like you and me?" was the usual way to remind each other of our common humanity.
This disdain for snootiness defines a lot of how Appalachian people think about others. Maybe they are just more vocal about it because really nobody like snootiness; it disturbs our need for social worth and lights up a place in our brain that registers pain the same as if we are physically hurt. We should take it very seriously. I’ll come back to that. But first I’m thinking of a historical lesson in snootiness from my part of the country - it's a lesson to remember today when we try to figure what's going on in our country.
Perhaps you'll see some parallels to our recent elections and Andrew Jackson’s election in 1828. Andrew Jackson’s political rise was deeply tied to his background and the resentment many Americans felt toward the elites of his time. His election as the 7th President of the United States in 1828 marked a significant shift in American politics. Let's delve into how "snootiness," or the elitist attitudes of his opponents, played a role in his victory and the broader psychological implications of being looked down upon.
Andrew Jackson was born in 1767 in the Carolinas to a poor Scots-Irish immigrant family. He grew up in a rough frontier environment and had little formal education. Jackson's humble origins stood in stark contrast to the previous presidents, most of whom were from wealthy, landowning Virginia or Massachusetts families. By the time Jackson entered politics, he had made a name for himself as a self-made man—a lawyer, a military hero in the War of 1812 (notably in the Battle of New Orleans), and a fiery, charismatic leader.
In the early 19th century, American politics was dominated by elites—wealthy, educated men from established families who viewed themselves as the rightful leaders of the country. This "aristocratic" class often dismissed men like Jackson as uncouth and unfit for high office. The political elite, centered around figures like John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay, represented the interests of the wealthy and were perceived as disconnected from the common people.
In 1824, Jackson ran for president and won the popular vote but did not secure a majority in the Electoral College. The election was decided in the House of Representatives, where John Quincy Adams was chosen as president in what Jackson and his supporters called the "Corrupt Bargain." Henry Clay, the Speaker of the House, threw his support behind Adams and was subsequently appointed Secretary of State. This backroom deal fed into Jackson's narrative that the elites were conspiring against the will of the people.
In the 1828 rematch between Jackson and Adams, the campaign was viciously personal. Adams' supporters portrayed Jackson as a coarse, uneducated, and violent man—someone entirely unsuited to the presidency. They mocked his rough upbringing, lack of formal education, and even questioned the legitimacy of his marriage. This elitist "snootiness," however, backfired spectacularly.
The more the elite mocked Jackson, the more the common people rallied around him. He became a symbol of the common man's struggle against a distant, arrogant elite. Jackson's supporters celebrated his frontier spirit, his military heroism, and his rough-hewn charisma. His campaign positioned him as an outsider who would bring change and stand up to the entrenched interests in Washington. He famously opened the White House to the public after his inauguration, signaling a new era where ordinary citizens would have access to power.
Jackson's victory was fueled by a wave of class resentment. When people are looked down upon by those in power, it often leads to feelings of frustration, anger, and a desire for retribution. In Jackson's case, his supporters saw in him a reflection of their own struggles. Social psychology tells us that when people feel disrespected or dismissed by the elites, they may turn to populist figures who promise to disrupt the status quo and champion the interests of the "little guy”.
Jackson's response to being looked down upon was defiance. Jackson's success was tied to his ability to forge a strong sense of group identity among his supporters, who saw themselves as the true Americans being marginalized by an out-of-touch elite.
Experiencing disdain or social exclusion often leads individuals to develop a kind of psychological armor. In Jackson's case, his aggressive, confrontational style was a defense mechanism against the disdain he faced. He was known for his fiery temper and willingness to engage in duels—he even famously carried a bullet in his body from a duel for much of his life. His assertive, even aggressive personality can be seen as a way to command respect in a society where he was initially dismissed as a rough outsider.
Jackson's presidency opened the door for future leaders who capitalized on class resentment and positioned themselves as champions of the people against a privileged elite. The emotional power of feeling looked down upon and the desire for recognition and respect continue to be powerful forces in American politics today. Political figures who can tap into this sentiment often gain significant support, as Jackson did, by positioning themselves as outsiders fighting for the common folk.
Andrew Jackson won the election because he harnessed the deep-seated resentment many Americans felt toward the elite's "snootiness." Jackson's story is a classic example of how the experience of being looked down upon can fuel a movement, leading individuals to rally behind a leader who embodies their values and frustrations.
Snootiness is no small thing. When we are looked down upon, we want revenge. I know that very well, but that doesn’t mean I don’t sometimes forget. I’m kicking myself for a snooty thing I did last night.
Thursday night is our community meal in Cashmere. The meal is wonderfully attended by all sorts of people – people with different politics and different social classes. And last night, Mike, one of our homeless, schizophrenic men attended.
I see Mike fairly often. He talks incessantly about aliens, his estate that was stolen from him, and being a highly ranked diplomat. We have worked hard to try to help him. But last night, I had had it with him. I just said, “Stop!” Of course, that was a stupid thing to do… and snooty.
Mike is not able to see that his brain doesn’t work right. He’s in denial. It’s called anosognosia (I'm thinking we all have this to some degree!). What I’ve learned, after researching this morning, is to use a particular method called LEAP with schizophrenics like Mike. But I can see that it has wide application for our relationships in general.
The technique is similar in some ways to our compassion practice and also similar to a technique recommended by Braver Angels when communicating with someone who sees the world differently than you. With schizophrenics it’s used to build trust and rapport (and ultimately collaboration). It stops confrontation and it’s respectful.
L - Listen (actively listen to the person’s perspective without interrupting or judging, even if their beliefs seem delusional.)
E – Empathize (try to understand and validate their feelings, showing genuine concern for their experiences.)
A - Agree (find areas of agreement, even if it’s just acknowledging shared observations or concerns, rather than directly contradicting their beliefs.)
P – Partner (work collaboratively to set achievable goals and address their needs if possible.)
People with schizophrenia often resist treatment due to the lack of insight into their illness, so LEAP helps bypass confrontation and encourages collaboration. It’s a respectful un-snooty approach.
As I mentioned, it could have wide value in our relationships, particularly with challenging people or any situation where we are wanting to build trust and collaboration.
There are many ways to be un-snooty with challenging folks. I heard a good story in our weekly compassion circle. This story stuck me as compassionately assertive.
One of the people in our circle is a retired vet. At one point in her practice a woman came in with a dog who needed treatment, however the woman immediately started telling the vet how she knew all about dogs. (Now as I was listening to this story, it was hard for me not to get snooty mentally in reaction to this woman I didn’t even know.)
The vet, however stayed cool, she did not try to dress the woman down; she showed no contempt. The vet was thinking that perhaps she looked too young to be trusted as knowledgeable. So, she gently explained to the woman that though she might look young, she had been practicing for over 15 years and had, herself, spent her entire life around animals (her father was a vet too).
Again, notice, she’s not being snooty, just being factual about her background…and doing it with understanding, acknowledging that one might not know she’s been practicing for some time since she possibly looks younger. She is not at all triggered by the woman’s behavior. She doesn’t lose her balance and say something demeaning.
And then the vet does something awesome, she says, “Instead of us arguing about who knows more, let’s put our heads together and figure out what’s going on with your dog.”
And they did just that!
Lots of good learning to take away from that story. And it helps me to remember from my Tennessee roots that snootiness is very hurtful…people won’t stand for it! When we feel that others show contempt for us, we go for people like Andrew Jackson who champions us, invites us inside the White House, and restores our sense of worth. (Though I don't mention it here, in other articles I've mentioned that according to relationship experts like John Gottman, when we show contempt for others close to us, that is, snootiness; it initiates relationship apocalypse.)
Now I’m not going to roll around the floor with people’s mutt like John, but I am going to experiment with the LEAP method the next time I see Mike; and I’m going to try it even with others who see the world differently than I do. And I’m going to remember the vet story – not to get triggered, stay calm, and focus on how to invite others to put their heads together with me.
How might we better hold America and all our relationships together by restraining our snooty impulses, by using respectful techniques to collaborate with others, and journey together to The Good Life?
I was glad to see Mark at the meal with a non political shirt on - the first one in ages. This one we can all endorse.
Who paints the beautiful watercolors?