Tag Archives: ideology

USING ANGER TO GET VOTES

Posted on by

#anger #politics #votes #politicians #ideology
Today’s politics is not about doing things to make people happy.

For many, it’s more about making people angry.

It’s less about ideology, and a set of sincere beliefs, than about personal grievance.

It’s almost as if politician X is just trying to get you mad at, or just to not like, politician Y.

In the past, politicians of all ideologies and parties conducted themselves like ladies and gentlemen, pointing out clear differences in ideas with their opponents. But, they refrained from attacking their opponents as bad people.

Today, the ladies and gentlemen of the political world have suddenly become unlikeable, per the messages of their opponents.

To be clear, these messages, in many cases, are filled with untruths. It doesn’t matter what you say about politician X, as long as it makes him or her a bad person.

The civilized is devolving toward the uncivilized.

Until that stops – it won’t stop until those who use such tactics find they aren’t effective – civilization will continue to devolve.

The question becomes: do we really want that? Are we really so angry as individuals that we have to find something, or someone, to blame?

Certainly, for some people, circumstances have not treated them well. They have lost a job, they have lost a business, they have lost someone close to them etc.

Is the knee-jerk reaction to get revenge? For some, it is. For others, soul-searching, or necessity, helps them move on.

Here’s a rule of thumb: when something bad happens to you, stop. Think about what you are going to do next. Don’t let bad impulses take over. Those impulses can turn law-abiding citizens into non-law-abiding citizens.

We, as a people, are better than our raw impulses. We KNOW right from wrong. We KNOW impulses get us into trouble. We KNOW things happen for a reason. We KNOW that often, when a door closes, a window opens.

We may not see the goodness of ourselves instantly. But we should not fill that delay with seeing perceived badness in others.

Resisting impulsive behavior is much easier said than done. It requires work. It requires thought. It requires us, as necessary, to stop before we act.

Anger comes easily to many. Therefore, having goodness triumph over anger requires effort. It requires not seeking revenge, but seeking, and finding, what’s next.

Not every calamity or tragedy produces happy endings. But revenge only compounds bad results.

If two wrongs don’t make a right, two tragedies don’t make a desirable solution.

It’s often said that success in life requires action, and it does. But when terrible circumstances hit us, a pause before action may be needed. Thinking before leaping may get you over a hurdle faster, and more smoothly.

We all get angry. Those who turn that anger into a positive effort will be rewarded handsomely. Those who vent first, and think later, will be punished.

Peter

IT’S NOT ABOUT FINDING SOLUTIONS; IT’S ABOUT WHOM TO BLAME

Posted on by

#blame #solutions #politics #DifferencesOfOpinion #CultureWar
“Most Americans could … be considered pragmatic moderates on the majority of political issues. While research (shows) some polarization has increases, it appears to have been exaggerated.”
So writes Gail Sahar, professor of psychology at Wheaton College in Norton, Mass. An article, adapted from her book “Blame and Political Attitudes:The Psychology of America’s Culture War,” was published June 21, 2023, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Sahar believes that the basis for democracy assumes people can reason. When we underestimate the American public’s ability to rationally consider issues, we undermine our nation’s foundation, she writes.
“The current focus on blame has emerged as the missing link connecting ideology to attitude across a range of issues,” she writes.
In current political discourse, people not only want everyone to follow what THEY believe in, but also want to blame someone else when things go wrong.
To paraphrase the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. Congress would get more done if they cared less about who gets the credit. The converse is also true. If nothing gets done, the other guy is to blame.
This culture of blame, as Sahar calls it, may arouse strong feelings on both sides of an issue. But, we always find an excuse to blame the other guy. Therefore, nothing of consequence gets done.
What if we all, regardless of core beliefs, focused on what we can accomplish, instead of what points we can score against the other guy?
The result would be incremental action toward the common good. Incremental actions, when added up, can yield real accomplishments.
What would help this process is everyone agreeing on facts. When one side doesn’t get its way, it can tend to say the other side was wrong, or fraudulent, and can tend to invent its own set of facts.
Then, to emphasize the point, they keep spouting this set of “facts” as if it were true, thinking enough people will believe them.
In most instances, there is one truth. Anything to the contrary is, at best, “spin,” or, at worst, false. Once the actual truth is discerned, we can come closer to agreement on what to do, or not do.
Facts can certainly get in the way of a good narrative, or a good conspiracy theory. Although some in power fit the category of wanting to screw, or blame, the other guy, most people want to know the truth, find ways to apply that truth to the problems at hand and find solutions.
Complete solutions may be elusive on first pass. Therefore, incremental solutions tend to produce more agreement.
Most successful people believe in the phrase, “Go big, or go home.”
In today’s discourse, that may be a pipe dream. We will get more done amid differences of opinions and worldviews if we start small. Then, after a time, we can go on to the next small thing. The toe-in-the-water approach may seem pointless to some. But, it may be the best way to arbitrate differences and get to real solutions.
There are big differences of opinion in as diverse a country as ours. It’s difficult to celebrate differences. It may be better to acknowledge them, find points of agreement – or, at least, compromise – and move toward solutions.
The journey toward solutions may be long. But, those who are successful in whatever they do usually find the journey more worthwhile than the destination.
Peter