Every week, I hope to explore a different societal or cultural issue that impacts our everyday lives, especially topics that will matter not just in the coming weeks or months, but in the decades to come. Some of these columns may be political, but in general, I plan on avoiding partisan politics and will mostly focus on issues concerning politics. This week’s column is about hyper-polarization and what we must do to fix this concerning problem. I hope you enjoy it.

One of the greatest concerns in American politics today is the growth of hyper-polarization, of the support of our political “team” regardless of what positions are supported or even whether we actually agree with our team.

Hyper-polarization was reflected throughout the 2016 presidential campaign when people (on both sides) blindly supported their party’s nomination, not because they necessarily agreed with the candidate, but because they saw Trump or Clinton as being “the better of two evils” or “the least worst option.”

Supporting the candidate of our own side is completely acceptable, even if we support them because we find the other option too unbearable or unfitting for the office they are running for, not only for president, but also for Congress and other offices.

But, throughout campaigns and even after when governing begins, we cannot allow ourselves to continue blindly supporting our team regardless of what actions they take.

Solving the problem of hyper-polarization was exemplified on Tuesday on the U.S. Senate floor. Sen. Jeff Flake, a Republican from Arizona, gave a speech denouncing the nature of today’s politics and specifically President Trump’s behavior in office.

Unfortunately, Sen. Flake announced this would be his final term, but if anything we must all demand more leaders like him.

Finding courageous leaders who are willing to criticize their own party is important, not because we should want to find people to “welcome to the resistance” (as one congressman suggested after Flake’s speech), but because we need leaders who are willing to defend the principles that have made the American Experiment work.

We need leaders like this on both sides. People who embrace the middle ground, who are willing to work with the other side, and who try their best on a daily basis to uphold the ideas at the root of this country. They may not be infallible, but at least we would know they acted in good faith.

On our level of day-to-day interaction, we need to make intentional efforts to not only engage with the opposing side but maintain respect towards those who hold different opinions than ourselves. Increasingly, many on the left seem just as intolerant as the most radical conservatives. UC Berkeley should not need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for Ben Shapiro – a traditional conservative – to come to share his ideas.

Though making these changes seem like nothing, opening our minds takes effort, and to get there, we sometimes need to decrease our attachment to our political positions. Zealotry and extremism in most things are negative; this rule especially applies to politics. If we value our own positions and the need to be “morally right” overseeing another’s humanity (regardless of their politics), then we are morally wrong. If politics blinds us, then we have already lost.

This idea seems to have been lost in politics today, and many seem to agree; if they did not, there would be no discussion of hyperpolarization. Yet, not enough action has been taken, and more must be done.

So, try to have a discussion with a person of the other side. Give them another chance. If we all can do this, we might just start fixing the problem of hyperpolarization and rebuild the “divided nation” so many complain America has become. This goal is not overly optimistic nor unachievable; we can reach it one conversation at a time.

Join me on Twitter.