Americans are at each other's throats. Here's one way out.

For a brief moment this month, we started to hear the proper words to describe what is happening in U.S. politics. Not the usual, safe and tired words like "polarization" or "incivility." But more accurate words.

At a news conference ahead of the impeachment proceedings, a reporter for a conservative outlet asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., whether she "hates" President Donald Trump. She rebuked the reporter, denying that she hates anyone. Like many questions lobbed at politicians as they walk away, that one was a trap. But it made me wonder what would have happened if the same question had been asked in a different way, not with malicious intent but with genuine curiosity.

Because hatred is what we should be talking about these days, at least as much as we talk about the facts. The American people appear to be in a "high conflict," which is a term of art among people who study conflict. A high conflict is one that feels existential and irresolvable, and it continues on its own momentum, even when specific problems could in fact be solved.

About one in every 20 conflicts operates this way, as social psychologist Peter Coleman describes in his book "The Five Percent." High conflicts can be interrupted, but not if we approach them the same way we handle normal conflicts. Left unchecked, high conflicts can become magnetic. Examples include the Middle East, Colombia, Cyprus, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Sudan, Angola and Northern Ireland.

"Once we are drawn in, they take control," Coleman writes. "They tend to enrage us, trap us, frustrate us, drain us of energy and other critical resources, and seem to never go away no matter what we do."

In high conflict, our brains behave differently.