Skip to main content

← Plato's Ethics on the Black Horse

When the Black Horse Calls You Disloyal: The Social Cost Inside a Family

Questioning a war costs something, and the bill often arrives at your own kitchen table. A brother who served. A father who trusts the President. A spouse who does not want the argument. A church friend who thinks asking questions is unpatriotic. For many parents, the hardest part of looking at the Iran record is not the reading. It is what happens when they say out loud what they read.

That cost is real. It is also exactly what Plato described.

Plato saw this coming​

In the Phaedrus, when the charioteer finally pulls back and refuses to go where the black horse wants, the black horse does not argue on the merits. It attacks the driver's character:

"the other, when the pain is over which the bridle and the fall had given him, having with difficulty taken breath, is full of wrath and reproaches, which he heaps upon the charioteer and his fellow-steed, for want of courage and manhood, declaring that they have been false to their agreement and guilty of desertion." — Plato, Phaedrus 254c–d, trans. Jowett

Cowardice. Lack of manhood. Breaking the agreement. Desertion. Those are the words the black horse uses against the part of the soul that is trying to do right.

In a family arguing about a war, the same words show up in the same order, often from people who love each other:

  • "You don't support the troops."
  • "Whose side are you on?"
  • "We agreed we'd back the President." (or "the party," or "our allies")
  • "You've been reading too much on the internet."

Plato's insight is that the accusation of disloyalty often comes from the part that is actually giving up, not from the part holding firm. A parent who asks "should my son be sent to Iran, and why?" is not deserting anyone. That parent is the one guarding the family.

The cost is measurable​

Political conflict inside families is not just a feeling. In a study published in Science on June 1, 2018, economists M. Keith Chen and Ryne Rohla paired smartphone location data with voting-precinct results to measure how long Thanksgiving dinners lasted. They found that "Thanksgiving dinners attended by opposing-party precinct residents were 30-50 minutes shorter than same-party dinners," and that in 2016 the effect was far larger for people from areas saturated with political advertising. They estimated "34 million person-hours of cross-partisan Thanksgiving discourse were lost in 2016 to partisan effects" (Chen and Rohla, Science 360(6392): 1020–1024; open preprint on arXiv).

Half an hour less with the people you love, every year, because of politics. That is the ordinary price, before anyone even mentions a war or a draft. It helps explain why so many parents choose to say nothing. It is a real cost, and wanting to avoid it is not shameful. It is simply the black horse wanting peace at home, which is a good thing wanted at the wrong moment.

The cost is public now, too​

In 2026 the argument does not stay at the kitchen table. In March, X's own news summary described a mother who shared "her oldest son's fearful text about a possible draft," a reply from another parent whose daughter had enlisted, and "Political voices" who "shared the screenshot with laughing emojis, gaining over 20,000 likes each" (X trending summary, March 15, 2026). A mother's worry became a joke for tens of thousands of strangers. Any parent watching learned what speaking up might cost.

Other families are paying it too​

This is not only an American problem, and it does not run in only one direction.

  • An Israeli parent, on Israel's own draft. Israel is fighting over whether to conscript ultra-Orthodox young men. One father wrote in September: "This is not an argument about who is right on the chareidi draft. I'm describing, as a parent now living through it, what this policy is doing inside families and the anger and alienation it is creating" (@dovid_s, September 24, 2026).
  • A daughter who changed her mind. A young Israeli woman who once wanted to be a combat soldier, over her mother's fierce objection, later came to oppose her country's wars. Her translated account ends in a family that no longer speaks: "I'm not in touch with my family. I don't speak to my mom, who lives under the same roof as me" (English translation, @ireallyhateyou, May 7, 2025). The cost of questioning fell on the person who questioned, and on her mother.
  • An American mother who switched sides. A homeschooling mother of a 13-year-old and a 14-year-old wrote that she had "shamefully defended" a politician because "I didn't want my daughter to think poorly of me for voting for him," until a video her daughter sent "forced me to open my eyes" (@Momyoffour4, September 24, 2026). For her, the family cost ran the other way: staying loyal to a position was what threatened her relationship with her children.

The black horse wants peace at home. Sometimes the only way to keep it long-term is a hard conversation now.

Why the silence costs more​

Now weigh it against the other side of the scale. The Selective Service System says automatic registration of young men, using federal data, will be in place by December 2026 (SSS Strategic Plan 2026–2030). An expert who told PolitiFact there is "no way" there will be a draft in this war gave as one reason that a draft "angers voters" (PolitiFact, March 9, 2026). Voters are angered one conversation at a time. Often the first conversation is inside a family.

A shorter Thanksgiving is a cost. A son on a list for a war nobody honestly explained to his parents is a larger one.

How to raise it without blowing up the family​

The goal is not to win. The goal is to get the people you love to look at the same page you looked at. Some approaches that keep the door open:

  • Start with the shared fear, not the conclusion. "I've been worried about the boys and this draft registration thing. Have you seen what Selective Service actually says?" Almost every parent shares that worry. The polls show most Americans oppose sending ground troops into Iran (Economist/YouGov, March 27–30, 2026).
  • Bring one document, not ten claims. Hand over one primary source from the shortest reading list. Let the paper do the arguing.
  • Use their sources when you can. If your relative trusts Fox News, show the Fox clip of Maria Bartiromo asking about mothers worried about a draft. If they trust Israel, show them the Times of Israel.
  • Respect the people who paid. Gold Star families hold every view on this war. Some, like Brenda May, supported the strikes (WTVR, February 28, 2026). Some veteran parents were arrested protesting it (Democracy Now!, April 21, 2026). Nobody at your table has a monopoly on patriotism.
  • Keep your nouns precise. Governments, officials, organizations, documents. Never a people. See fear of the antisemitism label.
  • Expect the reproach, and do not return it. When someone calls you disloyal, you now know where that comes from. You do not have to answer in kind.
  • Come back to it. In Plato, the black horse is tamed only after the driver pulls back "several times" (254e). One conversation rarely changes anything. The fifth might.
  • Ask questions instead of arguing. One parent described how she helped her own children out of beliefs they had picked up: she "Didn't directly challenge but asked them questions based on critical thinking and also making sure that if they were going to regurgitate what they heard that they looked up the actual source first" (@Saengard, September 23, 2026). The same approach works with adults.
  • Find the method you share. Parents who disagree about this war often agree on how to think. Amani Zang, a mother who supports the war, teaches her daughter that when she hears a judgment, she should "ask for specific reasons to back that statement ... If they cannot provide it, you hold your own thought, and go do research on your own" (@amani_zang, August 20, 2026). A parent who opposes the war can say, "Good. Let's do that together, with the draft law."

Talking with your own children​

Many of the people reading this page have children old enough to see war footage on their phones, and sons who will be on the Selective Service list soon. The advice from child psychologists, journalists, and parents on both sides of the war points the same way: ask what they have seen, tell the truth simply, do not hide the world but help them read it, and teach them to ask "Why now?" A father writing the week the U.S. killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani put it best: "Our children must learn to ask 'Why now?' when considering the timing of any aggression that risks the lives of others" (Andre Perry, The Hechinger Report, January 8, 2020).

Go deeper: Talking With Your Children About the War and the Draft, including what to say to a teenage son about registration, recruiters, and conscience.

When the cost is the whole family​

For some people the cost of questioning is not a shorter dinner. It is the family itself. The young Israeli woman who once wanted to enlist, over her mother's fierce objection, ended her account estranged: "I don't speak to my mom, who lives under the same roof as me." Her full story is on "Maybe I Preferred Not to Know". The lesson for an American parent is not to avoid the conversation. It is to start it early, gently, and with documents, before positions harden. Why so many people choose not to start it at all is the subject of The Comfortable Spectator.

What this means​

The social cost of questioning is not a sign that you are wrong. It is a sign that you are doing the thing Plato says is hard. The white horse, "a lover of honour," can be guided "by word and admonition only" (253d). Many of your relatives have that horse in them too. They need a word, a page, and time.

Sources on this page​

Research captures: twitter/t09__v108.md, t10__v109.md, t10__v117.md, t10__v118.md, t10__v120.md, t11__v132.md, t70__v829.md, t70__v833.md, t71__v841.md.

Status: M. Keith Chen is alive. Ryne Rohla is alive. Brenda May is alive. Amani Zang is alive. Beth Mosley is alive. Spencer Klavan is alive. Andre Perry is alive. C. S. Lewis is deceased (1963). Nothing on this page is a claim that anyone committed a crime.

Last Updated: 2026-09-26

Last updated on