When Mitt Romney commented in 2012 that 47 percent of Americans would vote for President Barack Obama because they were dependent on the government, I was in my senior year of high school in Manila, Philippines. And even though I was not an ardent supporter of Romney, I found myself on the defensive following his statement, from those who (rightly) believed his comment to be hateful and wished to extrapolate that the majority, if not all, Americans were the same.
As someone who originally grew up in the U.S., this put me in a predicament — though I was used to witnessing sparring between Democrats and Republicans, the criticisms levied toward me transcended political ideology and were instead based on nationality.
For those who plan to travel abroad in the next year, this year’s election could prove a similar but bigger challenge.
Romney’s comment pales in comparison to the constant stream of vitriol that has spewed out of the mouths of certain presidential candidates this year.
Though it would be a stretch to call this election totally unprecedented — plenty of racists have run for and even become President, after all — the media coverage of the 2016 campaign ensures that people all over the world will be picking apart every statement made by the eventual nominees for both parties.
Given the ignorance displayed by candidates like Donald Trump, that might at first sound daunting. People will no doubt have something to say, especially if they bring preconceived notions about the U.S. into the conversation.
But in the split second before you have to decide how to respond to a derisive generalization about the U.S. aimed at you, consider whether or not it is worth responding.
Because silence does not imply complicity. It implies that you are able to listen and understand the perspective of someone who comes from a background unlike your own.
And that is always more valuable than possessing the ability to hit derisively back.
