Post-Election Moral Injury
Hopelessness and loss in faith in others are hallmarks of moral injury
A deeply divided American public now faces the aftermath of the landslide re-election of Donald Trump. With the election of a new president and flipping of political power, the psychological toll of this high-stakes, morally laden election is coming into sharper focus.
The term “moral injury” — used to describe emotional harm stemming from perceived betrayals of moral beliefs — increasingly applies to the aftermath of polarizing elections like this one. Moral injury captures the sense that we do not really know each other and that our society doesn’t believe or act the way we thought it would. This can lead to a sense of hopelessness and loss of faith in individuals and organizations.
For many of us, elections are not focused on policy differences. They’ve become deeply personal and partisan, touching on core human values and challenging faith in societal institutions and the people around us.
Mixed Values and Emotions
For those whose candidate won, many likely feel elated or at least relieved, believing that the economic and social values they hold will be championed in the next four years. However, even with the landslide win, many Trump voters remain secretive (or “shy”) - perhaps to avoid the damaged relationships in divided political communities.
Since the election results became clear on Wednesday morning, liberal-leaning Americans are facing not just disappointment but profound disillusionment and destabilization. For the minority half of the voting electorate, the election of a convicted criminal who is openly racist, misogynistic, xenophobic, and ableist represents a profound social betrayal.
American voter values, priorities, and conflicting goals were on full display. We tend to flatten each other and speak in absolutes when discussing politics in America, but even a cursory look at the outcome reinforces a wide variety of reported values.
We will no doubt see these choices dissected in the coming weeks.
Voters for Trump, Harris, and third-party candidates described the race as choosing the lesser evil
High-power Republicans endorsed Harris over Trump, fearing the behaviors of his first presidency
Megan Stack wrote in NYT Opinion that her vote for Harris was morally conflicted due to Harris’s approach to Gaza and the ongoing genocide of Palestinians
Many voters who didn’t want to cast a vote for either Trump or Harris chose alternative candidates, some hoping to “send a message” about their political priorities
While voter turnout was high, a dip in voter turnout indicates more Americans chose not to vote compared to 2020
Voters in several states resoundingly supported abortion access yet also voted for the candidate who engineered SCOTUS to overturn Roe
For Harris supporters, the unwillingness to elect a woman of color feels like further evidence of the worsening political and cultural divide in America.
This disillusionment isn’t limited to one political party. Folks who chose not to vote or who voted for a candidate who could not possibly win were all making choices that might best align with their voting values.
The Concept of Moral Injury in Politics
Originally a term from military contexts, moral injury occurs when we witness or experience events that fundamentally betray our moral or ethical beliefs, resulting in feelings of guilt, betrayal, and hopelessness. Traditionally associated with soldiers confronting the ethical complexities of war, moral injury has found a place in the vocabulary of American politics, particularly when electoral results threaten how citizens believe the nation’s ideals should be realized.
For many who found Trump’s policies and rhetoric divisive, the resurgence of his popularity signals more than political disagreement. It suggests a further fracturing in America’s moral divide. When neighbors, colleagues, and family members endorse a candidate perceived as disregarding fundamental human rights or democratic principles, this support can feel like a personal betrayal.
Political Anxiety, PTSD, and Moral Injury
The psychological toll of election seasons is apparent as Americans reported high levels of “election anxiety” during the 2024 campaign. Americans increasingly expressing sleep disturbances, nervousness, and hopelessness about the future. Post-election periods can exacerbate feelings of despair and loss for those whose preferred candidate lost.
Psychologists have noted that after the 2020 election, instances of PTSD-like symptoms rose as divisiveness and hostility seeped into daily life.1 A study of election-related trauma had a real and lasting impact on mental health, with partisanship intensifying feelings of fear, distrust, and alienation between Americans on opposite sides of the political spectrum.2 Basically, the more you hated the other side, the worse your mental health.
While PTSD and moral injury are not the same thing, they share many features and can co-exist when there is both a source of trauma and a sense of being out of alignment with one’s deeply held values.
Let Down By Community and Country
The heart of moral injury in a post-election context lies in feeling let down by one’s community and country. For some, witnessing friends or family members actively supporting a candidate they view as morally objectionable can be a deeply painful experience. This sense of betrayal goes beyond disappointment; it’s a rupture in the social contract, where citizens feel alienated from the values they once believed they shared with those around them.
The result is often a profound sense of loneliness and loss, compounded by a growing inability to relate to those with differing political perspectives.
Institutional Betrayal and Eroded Trust
The role of institutional betrayal is another crucial factor contributing to moral injury after elections. Psychologist Jennifer Freyd’s research on institutional betrayal sheds light on how feelings of trust and safety are undermined when systems that are supposed to protect and support us fail.
This concept is highly relevant to elections, where many look to governmental institutions to uphold democratic principles. When individuals perceive that these institutions fail — whether through perceived biases, lack of transparency, or failures in upholding rights — the result can be disillusionment and a profound lack of trust and basic safety.
For instance, individuals who feel that the justice system, voting system, or political checks and balances have failed may interpret this failure as a betrayal by the structures meant to protect their rights. Looking back at the January 6 coup attempt, many conservatives believed so strongly the election had been “stolen,” and their government had betrayed them that they physically stormed the capital.
This institutional betrayal exacerbates the personal trauma experienced after a divisive election, leaving many questioning the integrity of the democracy itself. This eroding trust compounds personal relationships, deepening the divide between Americans and increasing the prevalence of moral injury symptoms.
Seeing the Other in a Divided Nation
Addressing moral injury in the wake of divisive elections isn’t easy, but acknowledging the personal and societal harm is a vital first step. Mental health professionals recommend prioritizing self-care during election cycles, including strategies to reduce news consumption, limit social media exposure, and practice mindfulness exercises to counter stress.
Rebuilding trust requires more than personal, internal healing; it necessitates a renewed commitment to empathy, dialogue, and understanding.
We must resist the temptation to flatten those we have been taught to view as the other. Even within parties, there are important disagreements about values and policy. We need to rebuild our ability to have these conversations from a place of dignity and respect for our fellow human beings. Acknowledging the diversity of perspectives is not about condoning actions or policies that one finds morally troubling but rather about striving to see the humanity in others despite political differences. This doesn’t resolve all conflicts, but it can prevent the erosion of shared social bonds that make communal life possible.
In this fraught moment, understanding and addressing moral injury as a product of divisive politics could be essential to fostering national resilience. Without confronting the emotional and psychological wounds of our partisan elections, it becomes increasingly challenging to envision a future where Americans can engage constructively - and rebuild faith in each other and in democracy.
Resources
Fraser T, Panagopoulos C, Smith K. Election-Related Post-Traumatic Stress: Evidence from the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Politics Life Sci. 2023 Nov;42(2):179-204. doi: 10.1017/pls.2023.8. PMID: 37987568.
Hagan MJ, Sladek MR, Luecken LJ, Doane LD. Event-related clinical distress in college students: Responses to the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. J Am Coll Health. 2020 Jan;68(1):21-25. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2018.1515763. Epub 2018 Oct 22. PMID: 30346876. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2018.1515763
I know I suffer from PTSD but our own elected officials and candidates are deliberately causing this. They aren’t being vetted or screened and we are getting corrupted people on both sides. These are bad people but lack finesse or care about the damage they cause.
Yes so true and thank you