
“Don’t think of a hateful elephant.“
By Alan 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 initially 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” framework 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 may 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 just coming off the Healthy Davis Together COVID testing initiative. Indeed, the hatefreetogether.org website describes hate as a virus, setting a goal of “total eradication”—implying the program will functions 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 “victims”? This dynamic incentivizes groups to highlight their own trauma and victimhood while blaming others—rather than accepting responsibility for working to a safe, welcoming, and pluralistic community. There is even an incentive to traumatize your own people: stoking fear is a well-known political tool. This is not ‘victim’ blaming (again who is the victim?) but suggests the tactics “victims” choose count.
(more…)









