Extreme Views by Guest Blogger Jack Bates, Psychology, Indiana University

Note from Larry: Jack Bates wrote the below after last week's blog. I was wondering what caused the movement of so many people to the ideological political extremes. I think Jack did a great job of thinking about causes of this schism.

              

Here are some factors to add to your column and what I saw in a quick scan of the comments:

1. The U.S. political primary system rewards extreme politicians over bridge builders, because those who actually vote in primaries tend to hold more extreme views.

2. The amount of money it takes to get elected and re-elected has our officials dialing for dollars rather than trying to understand each other at the Washington DC equivalent of the Latona Pub.

3. And why does it take so much money to get elected? Because special interests (such as Dark Money billionaires) have figured out that relatively small investments (for them) in lobbyists and support for candidates and think tanks makes them much wealthier. These same interests also have learned to control the propaganda flows and are now turning their money toward more and more local politics.

4. There are few common sources for information. When it comes to attitude influencing, psychologists learned a long time ago that even if a person is initially skeptical about a proposed attitude because of who it’s coming from, they soon forget the source, and the new attitude sticks, especially if they hear it enough times. We don’t get our attitudes at the local saloon or union hall anymore. 

     Moderate people are not in church much anymore, either. Don’t get me started on the popular, evangelical churches—such an interesting topic. As one of your commenters mentioned, social media influence us, but this too can be manipulated toward the extremes. Sleep-deprived, generally stressed people sitting at the computer are going to follow the excitement, not the reasoned argument with nuance. Factions are an efficient way to decide what your attitudes are. I’m a member of X faction, therefore, if someone from X says it, then that’s good enough for me. No need to bother to talk to any Y’s.

5. Anxious people secretly like bullies. We’re being made anxious by social/economic/political/ climate change, and the propagandists know how to really goose our anxiety. So, if a political leader seems reasonable and amenable to compromise, we fear that they’re weak. And if a political leader of X faction is firm, categorical, rejecting of nuance, and openly hostile to faction Y, that seems reassuring (not that people necessarily think this way consciously).

6. Younger people especially don’t think of themselves as playing an important role in politics, and many do not even care if we preserve our democracy. In general, one of the major “benefits” of negative advertising is to turn voters off. So, again, the more extreme people dominate.

Have you seen the November (I think) issue of The Atlantic, "How to Avoid a Civil War"? Lots of good ideas for untangling this mess. I can’t say I’m highly optimistic, but in chaotic systems, sometimes there will be a big change. Maybe the climate change issue will become enough of a common cause (to pick up one of your reader’s ideas).

Best,

Jack