On Nov. 8, 2016, Donald Trump was elected president of the United States. As we headed into Election Day, tension was present, but many were relaxed under the assumption that we would be electing our first female president. Despite her flaws or shortcomings, we were confident that Hillary Clinton would see victory over a racist, sexist and xenophobic candidate. We assumed there would be reason, but as the polls closed and results rolled in, we saw that there was none to be found.

As we looked around our newsroom, exasperation and defeat were evident on a night we had hoped would move our country forward. While many of us may be in shock at the result of this election, the fact is that the conditions for this outcome have been present in our country for much of its history. The hateful rhetoric and divisiveness that have risen to the surface over the last year and a half are not new characteristics of the United States’ identity. The language that Trump and his supporters used was shocking but not foreign. He did not introduce any new language or ideas to the people of the United States. Rather, he created a haven from which hate speech has freely flown. Trump tapped into a market of bigotry that had been repressed to a degree and invisible to those unaffected, but had always existed.

The breaking point didn’t come when Trump won the majority of electoral votes. It didn’t occur when he won the Republican nomination for president. If there had been one definite point of no return, then perhaps this election would be more comprehensible. Instead, there were multiple breaking points that never came to be. The American people should have disqualified Trump’s candidacy when he said that Mexicans were rapists. Support for his campaign should have fallen off when he made constant degrading comments about women.

But, it didn’t. And that begs a major question: What about Trump’s horrible statements enabled us to bypass his corruption, when Clinton’s scandals remained such static obstacles in her candidacy? What kind of values do we possess, that such overt and damaging discrimination can be overlooked? How have we fostered a culture that allows this? Even looking around a college campus, we see strict policy preventing and punishing cheating on exams, but no such extreme practices are in place to prevent hate speech. As a University we accept that a stolen paper is met with potential expulsion, but Title IX investigations are quickly minimized or forgotten.

As we embark upon the next four years, we cannot allow the negative features of our society that this election has uncovered — the misogyny, the racism and the general hatred for anyone who represents difference — to take deeper root. Just because a man who espouses these values has been elected to the highest office, does not mean that ascription to these beliefs should be tolerated. Rather, we must remain steadfast in our intolerance of these values and our commitment to progress.

We must be careful not to rush to unity as the first and only answer. There is an instinctual need to fix problems in a way that can just cover up the damage. We should instead take the following days (or years) to understand why the election unfolded the way that it did, and to understand the concerns of those that influenced it.

It seems now that only way for us to move forward is to take a step back and re-examine what went wrong. This examination must start as close to home as possible; we have to carefully consider the practices and ideas that allowed such a bigoted candidate to appeal to so many Americans.

It’s tempting to label all of Trump’s supporters as racists and misogynists. But the fact is, their beliefs must come from somewhere, and we must seek to learn more about them. As a nation, we do ourselves no favors by refusing to listen, even if every instinct tells us to ignore them. We have to make the effort to understand the needs of the people that found their concerns addressed by the promises of a Trump presidency. It will take humility and courage to face not only those we consider our political opponents, but also ourselves.

In the upcoming years, it is likely that much of the progress on issues that we — as the Pipe Dream Editorial Board and a majority of the student population at BU — have supported will be lost. For a large portion of the student body, the values and beliefs that we hold close will be threatened. We cannot continue to view supporters of an opposing candidate or party as others, less-thans or irrelevant. We cannot fight divisiveness with more divisiveness. We cannot fight hate with hate.

In the next months, our country and society are destined to maneuver a tumultuous political and social climate. We pledge, as the Pipe Dream Editorial Board, to face it head-on.