The Elephant and the Rider: What My Conservative Friend Back Home Taught Me About the ICE Protests

tl;dr: Today and tomorrow, thousands of Americans are protesting ICE. My conservative friend back home thinks they’re crazy. I think he’s missing something important—and a book about moral psychology might explain why we’re both a little bit right.

---

If you’re reading this on January 30th or 31st, 2026, there’s a good chance you’ve seen the headlines about the National Shutdown protests. Thousands of people across the country are walking out of work, skipping shopping, and taking to the streets to protest ICE enforcement tactics.

And if you’re anything like my conservative friend back home—a firefighter in Oklahoma who I’ve been debating via text for the past week—you’re probably wondering: What the hell are these people so upset about?

Here’s the thing: I think that question is actually worth taking seriously. Not because the protestors are wrong (I don’t think they are), but because the inability to even understand what motivates the other side is tearing this country apart.

So let me try something different. Instead of just giving you my arguments—which I’ve already deployed in excruciating, citation-laden detail to my friend—let me use a book I recently finished to explain why we might both be missing something.

---

The Elephant in the Room (And On Your Back)

Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Disagree About Politics and Religion has one of those central metaphors that, once you hear it, you can’t unsee.

Human reasoning, Haidt argues, is like a Rider on an Elephant. The Elephant is our gut instinct—our immediate emotional reaction to the world. The Rider is our conscious, rational mind. Here’s the kicker: the Elephant decides where to go first, and then the Rider makes up reasons to justify the path.

We like to think we’re all Rider. We believe we carefully weigh evidence, consider multiple perspectives, and arrive at logical conclusions. In reality, the Elephant has already started walking before the Rider even wakes up. The Rider’s job isn’t to steer—it’s to be the Elephant’s press secretary, spinning narratives to make the Elephant’s decisions look rational.

This isn’t a bug. It’s a feature of how human cognition evolved. And it explains why political debates feel so maddening: you’re trying to convince someone’s Rider while their Elephant has already left the building.

---

A Week in the Trenches

For the past week, I’ve been in a text battle with my buddy from back home. He’s a firefighter—the kind of person who runs into burning buildings while everyone else runs out. He’s also a staunch Trump supporter who genuinely cannot understand why people are protesting ICE.

His position, summarized: If you’re here legally and not a criminal, you have nothing to worry about. The protestors are just Democrats mad that their voters are getting deported. ICE is just enforcing laws we’ve had for decades. If people would stop being violent and getting in the way, there wouldn’t be any problems.

My position, summarized in three increasingly citation-heavy rebuttals: ICE’s tactics have changed dramatically—masked agents, military-style raids, two U.S. citizens killed in weeks. The data shows 73% of people in ICE detention have no criminal convictions. We’re spending $170 billion on this while the guy running it got caught on FBI cameras taking $50,000 in cash. This isn’t law enforcement; it’s a deportation-industrial complex that benefits private prison companies.

After each of my rebuttals, his response pattern was remarkably consistent:

• “I don’t know how true any of this is…”
• “That police chief is far left…”
• “I’m sure his officers are embarrassed to have him…”
• “No idea if any of this is true and never heard about it…”

And here’s the thing: he’s not being intellectually dishonest. He’s being human.

---

Talking to Elephants

Haidt’s research shows that when we encounter information that challenges our existing beliefs, our first instinct isn’t curiosity—it’s defense. The Elephant feels threatened, plants its feet, and the Rider immediately starts looking for reasons to dismiss the threat.

Watch how this played out in our exchange:

Me: “Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara—a 20-year career cop who started in Newark, one of the toughest precincts in the country—has criticized ICE’s masked tactics as dangerous and counterproductive.”

Him: “That police chief is as far left as all the protestors. I’m sure his officers are embarrassed to have him as chief.”

Notice what happened there. I provided credentials (20-year career, Newark veteran, unanimously confirmed). His Elephant immediately generated a narrative to dismiss it (he’s far left, his officers are embarrassed) without any evidence—just the feeling that must be true.

But here’s the uncomfortable part: I do the same thing.

When my friend sends me a stat like “estimated benefits to illegal immigrants total $180 billion annually,” my first instinct isn’t “let me investigate this carefully.” It’s “that sounds like right-wing propaganda—where’s it from?” My Elephant is dismissing before my Rider can investigate.

---

The Six Moral Foundations (And Why We Keep Talking Past Each Other)

Haidt’s other big contribution is identifying six “moral foundations”—the fundamental intuitions that underlie our political beliefs:

1. Care/Harm: Protecting the vulnerable from suffering
2. Fairness/Cheating: Ensuring people get what they deserve
3. Loyalty/Betrayal: Standing with your group against outsiders
4. Authority/Subversion: Respecting tradition and legitimate authority
5. Sanctity/Degradation: Avoiding disgust and contamination
6. Liberty/Oppression: Resisting domination and control

Here’s the key finding: liberals tend to prioritize Care and Fairness above all else. Conservatives tend to value all six foundations more equally, including Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity.

This explains so much about the ICE debate:

When protestors see ICE raids, they see:

• Care violation: Families being torn apart, children traumatized
• Fairness violation: People being detained without criminal convictions
• Liberty violation: Government overreach, masked agents refusing identification

When my friend sees ICE raids, he sees:

• Authority upheld: Law enforcement doing their job
• Fairness upheld: People who broke the law facing consequences
• Loyalty upheld: Protecting “real Americans” from outsiders who jumped the line
• Sanctity upheld: Maintaining the integrity of the border

We’re not just disagreeing about facts. We’re weighing different moral values.

When I tell my friend that Chief O’Hara has criticized ICE tactics, he processes this through an Authority/Loyalty lens: Is this chief on our team? Does he respect law enforcement? When I process Trump killing the Lankford border bill, I see it through a Fairness lens: You sacrificed a solution for political theater!

Neither of us is “wrong” about our values. But we’re speaking different moral languages.

---

So What Does This Mean for the Protests?

If you’re marching today or tomorrow, you probably feel a righteous anger about what ICE is doing. That anger is real and it’s justified by your moral foundations. You see Care being violated. You see Fairness being trampled.

But here’s what Haidt would tell you: your conservative neighbor isn’t marching because their moral intuitions are different, not because they’re evil or stupid.

When my friend says “if you’re here legally, you have nothing to worry about,” he’s expressing a genuine moral intuition about fairness—the idea that people who followed the rules shouldn’t be treated the same as people who didn’t. When he says “protesters are bringing it upon themselves” by getting in the way, he’s expressing an intuition about authority—the idea that law enforcement deserves compliance.

From his perspective, the protestors aren’t righteous defenders of the vulnerable. They’re rule-breakers defending other rule-breakers, and they’re making life harder for the cops and firefighters who put their lives on the line every day.

That’s not a crazy position. It’s a predictable one, given his moral foundations.

---

The Facts Still Matter (But They’re Not Enough)

Now, let me be clear: I still think my friend is wrong on the facts. The data doesn’t support his narrative:

• 73.6% of people in ICE detention have no criminal convictions (TRAC Immigration)
• ICE has killed two U.S. citizens in recent weeks—Renee Good and Alex Pretti—after years of non-lethal enforcement (NYT)
• Border Czar Tom Homan was recorded on FBI cameras accepting $50,000 in cash from undercover agents in exchange for promises of government contracts (MSNBC, Ground News)
• Senator Lankford’s bipartisan border bill—the toughest in 40 years—was killed by Trump for campaign optics (KGOU)
• Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in taxes in 2022, including $34 billion into Social Security and Medicare—benefits they can never collect (ITEP)

These facts matter. I’m not a relativist who thinks all positions are equally valid.

But here’s what The Righteous Mind taught me: facts alone won’t change minds. If you want to persuade, you have to speak to the Elephant first. You have to understand what moral foundations your audience values and frame your arguments in those terms.

---

A Different Kind of Argument

So let me try something I didn’t try with my friend in real-time. Let me make the case against current ICE tactics using conservative moral foundations:

Authority: Chief O’Hara isn’t some Berkeley activist. He’s a 20-year cop who started in Newark—one of the most dangerous cities in America. He worked his way up to run a department of 1,000 cops and 650 firefighters. When he says masked agents refusing to identify themselves is dangerous and counterproductive, he’s speaking from professional authority. The Minneapolis PD went an entire year without a police-involved shooting under his leadership. That’s not “far left”—that’s competence.

Loyalty: Senator James Lankford is an Oklahoma Republican who spent months building the toughest border bill in 40 years. He did it for his constituents—including my friend’s neighbors. Trump killed it to keep the chaos going through an election. That’s not loyalty to conservative values; it’s betrayal of the people who trusted him to solve the problem.

Fairness: If we’re worried about freeloaders, let’s talk about the actual freeloaders. The IRS estimates the wealthy and corporations dodge $700 billion in taxes every year. Undocumented immigrants pay $100 billion into a system they can never benefit from. We’re spending $170 billion to hunt down the people subsidizing our Social Security while letting the real cheaters off the hook. That’s not fair—it’s a bad deal.

Sanctity: The current administration’s Border Czar was caught on FBI cameras taking a $50,000 bribe in a restaurant takeout bag. The investigation was shut down when his allies took power. If a building inspector took a bribe and looked the other way on a code violation that later killed people, would we say “oh well, good for him”? The same standard should apply to the man running the deportation machine.

---

The Uncomfortable Truth

My friend and I aren’t going to agree on everything. His Elephant and my Elephant are walking different directions, and our Riders are just along for the ride.

But maybe—maybe—we can at least understand why the other side feels the way they do.

When I see protestors blocking ICE vans today, I see people standing up for the vulnerable against a system that has become cruel and corrupt.

When my friend sees those same protestors, he sees people disrespecting authority and defending rule-breakers.

We’re both looking at the same facts through different moral lenses. And until we acknowledge that, we’re going to keep shouting past each other.

---

What You Can Actually Do

If you’re protesting today or tomorrow, here’s my advice:

1. Be peaceful. This isn’t just tactically smart—it’s the only way to avoid confirming the “violent liberal mob” narrative that conservative media will happily run with.

2. Know your facts. The data is on our side. 73% non-criminal detainees. Two citizens killed. $50,000 in a takeout bag. Memorize a few of these.

3. Speak to their values. When you talk to your conservative relatives, don’t just hammer Care and Fairness. Try Authority (professional cops criticizing these tactics), Loyalty (Oklahoma’s own senator was betrayed), and Sanctity (the guy in charge took a bribe).

4. Listen. Really listen. Understand that your conservative neighbor isn’t evil—they’re weighing different moral values than you are. That doesn’t make them right, but it explains why they’re not persuaded by arguments that seem obvious to you.

5. Stay humble. Your Elephant is walking too. Make sure your Rider is checking the map occasionally.

---

The protests happening today and tomorrow aren’t going to change Tom Homan’s mind. They’re probably not going to change my friend’s mind either.

But they might change the political calculation. They might make some Republican senator wonder if this is really the hill to die on. They might make some corporation think twice before signing that private prison contract.

And they might—just might—start a conversation that eventually reaches across the moral divide.

My friend ended our last exchange with “Love ya.”

I said it back. Because despite everything, I do.

That’s the Elephant worth riding.

---

Reference Links:

• The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt: Amazon
• TRAC Immigration Data: https://tracreports.org/immigration/quickfacts/
• ITEP Tax Study: https://itep.org/undocumented-immigrants-taxes-2024/
• Lankford Border Bill: https://www.kgou.org/politics-and-government/2024-08-22/
• Chief O’Hara on ICE: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/12/podcasts/the-daily/minneapolis-police-chief-ice-shooting.html
• Tom Homan Investigation: MSNBC, Snopes
• Cato Institute on Immigrant Welfare Usage: https://www.cato.org/briefing-paper/immigrant-native-consumption-means-tested-welfare-entitlement-benefits-2022
• National Shutdown Protests: https://nationalshutdown.org/home#register-action