political spectrums and tribalism

[Sisyphus]

This is a minor and vague rant, apropos of nothing in particular.

 

Is anyone else tired of talk of political "spectrums" and/or the use of that ubiquitous 2-axis political chart with "economic" and "social" variables ranging from "libertarian" to "authoritarian?" Does anyone else really not fit anywhere? Problems:

 

Positions on different issues are not always "consistent" on a right-left scale, nor need they be in order to be logically consistent. If regarding one social issue I have radical ideas identified (by who?) as "liberal," and on another I have radical ideas identified as "conservative," I'd end up squarely in the middle of the graph, despite having no even remotely "moderate" views.

 

And since when can any thoughtful opinion on a real issue be reduced to a point on a scale? Is it not absurd to say that every issue has two and only two possible perspectives, of which a person is defined by the ratio of sympathy between them?

 

I am putting forth that this type of simplification is primarily just a product of tribalism. Humans have deeply ingrained instinctive attitudes towards in-groups and out-groups, and we like ways of quickly labeling people as one or the other so that we know how to feel about them. We all do it. I do it. Even though my views on a lot of issues are not especially "liberal," I still find myself thinking of myself as one, and getting prickly when "liberals" are attacked. I know fully well this is ridiculous, and I know that associating myself with half the entire population means that "we" will be attacked constantly, and I know that there's no reason I should feel in any way responsible for all the stupid shit that members of such an enormous group inevitably will do. But knowing it's irrational is only a partial comfort. Stupid instincts.

 

To fight this, in conversation I try to avoid using any label to refer to myself for as long as possible, to avoid being put in categories. But I can usually see the gears working in the other person, listening intently for those all-important flags for identifying my tribe. The other day I was having a conversation about economics, and I must have said something to give the impression that I was a "liberal." The other guy, a "conservative," went from looking confused to being an avenging zealot of conservatism. He wasn't arguing with what I had actually been saying, mind you, but rather what he assumed I was really thinking - including things that had nothing to do with the discussion we had previously been having - based solely on his stereotype of the tribe. He ended up passionately defending ideas that I, in fact, mostly already agreed with, and as a result ended up acting like he had "won the argument." It was really annoying, and fairly typical. I've also had liberals, libertarians, etc. do the same thing. Everyone seems to end up assuming I'm the embodiment of everything they disagree with. Anyone else have similar experiences?

[ParanoiA]

But doesn't it seem inherent to our design? Isn't that how our brains function? Labeling something and then sticking it in memory. Accessing it later - using the label as the index - without having to recall all of the specifics that fall under that label?

 

Probably not making sense here. Just so happens I've been contemplating a similar line of thought to yours, but not in political terms. In that, I've been wondering if our labeling obsession is a basic inherent function of our brain design. A design that we have passed on to computers, perhaps unconciously, intuitively. Their "brains" seem to be designed similarly - blocks of information with labels, to be referenced for processing.

 

Of course, yeah I totally agree with your premise. And I definitely can relate to 'seeing the gears working in the other person, listening intently for those all-important flags for identifying my tribe' - they usually nail me when I say something pro-profit. Of course, I get them back when they realize I'm not a simplistic righty.

[CDarwin]

But doesn't it seem inherent to our design? Isn't that how our brains function? Labeling something and then sticking it in memory. Accessing it later - using the label as the index - without having to recall all of the specifics that fall under that label?

 

Probably not making sense here. Just so happens I've been contemplating a similar line of thought to yours, but not in political terms. In that, I've been wondering if our labeling obsession is a basic inherent function of our brain design. A design that we have passed on to computers, perhaps unconciously, intuitively. Their "brains" seem to be designed similarly - blocks of information with labels, to be referenced for processing.

 

Just so you know, what your talking about was basically suggested by Claude Levi-Struass, the 20th Century French originator of Structural Anthropology.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_anthropology

 

I tend to attribute this "tribalism," as Sisyphus terms it, less to biology and more to a particular trend in the Western cultural tradition. Westerners like to think of the world as divided into grand ideologies who oppose each other on a cosmic scale. It stretches back to the Zoroastrianism, the good/evil dichotomy from which was enshrined in the Hebraic belief systems that formed much of the core of Western thought for the next 3 millennia. You should always be cautious imposing grand intrinsic motivations to the entire sweep of humanity when cultural influences can run so deep and often be difficult to spot.

[Pangloss]

Even though my views on a lot of issues are not especially "liberal," I still find myself thinking of myself as one, and getting prickly when "liberals" are attacked. I know fully well this is ridiculous, and I know that associating myself with half the entire population means that "we" will be attacked constantly, and I know that there's no reason I should feel in any way responsible for all the stupid shit that members of such an enormous group inevitably will do. But knowing it's irrational is only a partial comfort. Stupid instincts.

 

I do the same thing, on the "conservative" side, so I know what you mean.

 

I think a LOT of people used to carefully set aside their initial reactions, and have stopped doing so because of the media. We've forgotten how to do it and why it's important, at the very time when we should be pushing for EVERYONE to behave that way.

 

 

He wasn't arguing with what I had actually been saying, mind you, but rather what he assumed I was really thinking - including things that had nothing to do with the discussion we had previously been having - based solely on his stereotype of the tribe. He ended up passionately defending ideas that I, in fact, mostly already agreed with, and as a result ended up acting like he had "won the argument." It was really annoying, and fairly typical. I've also had liberals, libertarians, etc. do the same thing. Everyone seems to end up assuming I'm the embodiment of everything they disagree with. Anyone else have similar experiences?

 

Yes, definitely, that happens to me quite often. I respond or raise an issue and find myself ideologically niched, and responded-to on that basis, before I can utter a second sentence.

 

It also can invade a discussion by surprise. I find myself having to be careful using examples in the classroom lest I give the impression that I am fully aligned with either the left or the right.

 

On a more positive note, I think improving my own awareness of this problem has helped me to stop from prejudging other people based on similar remarks. When I hear somebody talk about universal healthcare I stop myself from assuming they're a liberal. If I hear people talking about "defending our borders" I stop myself from assuming they're conservative. That sort of thing. But it requires a concious effort, which suggests that it should come as no surprise that other people aren't doing this. (shrug)

[iNow]

If someone spends all of their time saying how much they hate apples and oranges and bananas, then it's not always wrong to conclude that they just don't like fruit.

 

 

I do it all of the time, anticipating someone's response based on previously expressed positions and stances. It's only when people do it to me that I challenge the whole idea of the type caste.

 

Ultimately though, you can only make changes in yourself and hope those changes trickle out to others in your societal grouping. If you prevent yourself from type casting then you're doing fine. Just don't let the politidiots get under your skin.

[Pangloss]

Ultimately though, you can only make changes in yourself and hope those changes trickle out to others in your societal grouping. If you prevent yourself from type casting then you're doing fine. Just don't let the politidiots get under your skin.

 

Lol, good one there. /agree