The CNBC Republican Debate (or Don't Ask Me that Question it's Biased!)

While I know it may not be trendy to give the other side serious consideration in today's political landscape, I watched the Republican debate and have to say it was informative. It was refreshing to see the Republican candidates talk about issues and policy instead of mudslinging on each other. One thing I did notice was a tendency to go after the tried and true screams of "Liberal Media Bias!" whenever a tough question was asked and while I know this reflects well for the base, once they get out beyond the primaries they are going to have to come up with a better answer.

While I could probably go on forever about each candidate, I only have so much space and time to write so I figured the best way to give a review of last night would be to rank the candidates on how I thought they did. I am not ranking them according to any poll, I am ranking them based on how I feel they did.. Starting with last going to first let the rankings begin!

Mike Huckabee - I am not a huge fan of Huckabee because quite honestly I just don't trust zealots in government. However, one thing I do like about this guy is he is honest and willing to say what he believes instead of what you want to hear. While I won't ever see eye to eye with him, I do respect him I just don't know if I want him near the White House.

When it comes to the debate last night I can't really say he made much of an impression on me. While he had a few moments and I even cheered him on when he defended Social Security, he really wasn't in the mix enough to do much for his chances of getting noticed. Huckabee needed to really show up last night but other than a few moments you could easily forget he was even on stage.

John Kasich - While Kasich is the most realistic candidate on either side, he doesn't do much to earn points among the Republican base. I think he would make a good president but he is running a campaign that appeals to moderate conservatives and that is going to hurt him in the long run. This is sad because out of all the candidates on either side, I really think he would offer the country the best chance at actually getting anything done.

When it comes to his debate performance last night I was excited to see him coming out of the gate swinging but aside form that he didn't show much of a spark. I think the big problem is that right now the base of his party has zero interest in compromise and given the fact he is a moderate, I just don't see how long he can stay in the race.

Ted Cruz - I have a hard time listening to Cruz say anything and not feel like he is trying to sell me a used car for a new car price. I don't know if it is his hair cut or what but he has always made me feel like I am watching a con man at work. I wish I could say last night made me feel differently, but it didn't. While I like the surface of his tax plan I felt he spent a lot of his time last night talking about how he "also had that idea".

I think overall Cruz had a fairly solid debate, but he didn't show me anything special. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets his turn as a front runner sooner or later, but until he finds a way to loose that used car salesman vibe I don't know how far he will actually get.

Jeb Bush - For a guy who was supposed to be the establishment choice, Bush seems to have a hard time actually being seen. I am writing this the night after and I almost forgot he was even on stage. Some of this is because the guy is understated, but some of it is that he represents the establishment a bit to much right now, and the Republican base is about done with the establishment at this point.

I think out of everyone he did the least to advance himself. In fact out of all the candidates he was really the only one to get blown out of the water by another candidate. Instead of attacking Rubio he should have kept is mouth shut. In the end Jeb may actually be one of the better qualified people running but he has to do something to be less invisible or he won't last much longer.

Rand Paul - I have never been shy about my admiration for Rand Paul. In a career that is filled with liars and crooks he is one of the few that has managed to maintain his integrity. Out of all the Republicans he is the only one that actually means limited government when he talks about small government. Out of all the Republicans he is the only one that means hands out of everyone  pocket when he talks tax breaks and tax plans. If I didn't disagree with him on a few major issues I would likely be campaigning for the guy.

With that said, I have to admit he didn't really show me much in last nights debate. There were a lot of times he kind of sat there on the edge of the stage not really saying or doing much of anything. While I admire his actions as a gentleman, if  he is going to get his message out he is going to have to get out there and take some of the light for himself.

Carly Fiorina - Caly Fiorina would probably be a front runner if she were a male when you realize that compared to everyone else on that stage, she actually had the most substance to her issues and policies. While I personally don't like her involvement with the Big Corps and am skeptical on how much her version of "deregulation" would actually benefit the middle class, she at least has a plan.

I think she did well in the debate last night, but she didn't do enough to get people to really take notice. Unfortunately it's a fact that unless you are She who has been Anointed, if you are a woman, you have to balance sounding strong with not coming across as a shrew. Sad, because honestly I think if she could take off the gloves, she would show the boys club she has just as much vim and vigor as they do.

Chris Christie - I really believe if Christie had been in the picture in '08 he would have had a real shot at the White House. Unfortunately I think he is a bit late and has to much of a record of compromise to win the Republican nod today. I like his energy and fire but his views on security leave me a bit worried about a police state.

As far as his debate performance, I think he had one of the best moments in the entire debate when he went after the moderators about talking about fantasy football instead of real issues. While I dig Christie a lot, in the end I just don't think he did enough to separate himself from the pack.

Marco Rubio - I tell you something, if we were back in '08 I think Rubio would have been the best thing the Republican party could have thrown against Obama. This guy has some serious charisma and what he has to say really resonates with a lot of Americans. I love the guys rhetoric but sadly, he doesn't have as much substance as I would like. Give this guy a few more years though and I bet he makes a real run for the White House.

Out of the ten candidates on stage last night I think Rubio did the most to help himself. He started out with using Jeb Bush to mop the floor then stood in there and went blow for blow against the moderators. While I don't think he is going to be the last man standing this election cycle, I do think he is going to be around a bit longer than most. Hell, if he does manage to grab the nomination I might just vote for the guy.

Ben Carson -I actually like Carson as a person even if some of his views are a bit out there. As a presidential candidate though not so sure I would be getting behind him. One of the things that kind of bugs me about him is he is all kinds of anti government hand out, yet he got to where he is by using government hand outs. This kind of thing always bugs me for some reason.

As far as the debate goes, I think he did a great job. The only thing I didn't like was him avoiding the question about manatech. He said he didn't have any involvement with them when he actually did. Not only that but he then hid behind the "liberal bias!" shield Republicans like to use any time the facts go against what they said. I think Dr. Carson would have been much better served had he said "I was involved with them to a limited extent, I use their product, can we get back to something that matters please".

Donald Trump - If there is a candidate that has ever caused me more confusion than Trump I am unable to remember them. On one hand this guy says some of the stupidest things on the planet, he really does. On the other his record as a businessman, philanthropist, and hard worker can't be denied. There is a lot I agree with the Donald on but at the same time, I can't quite over past some of the horrible things he said when he first entered the race.

As far as last night goes.. While I don't know if there was a "winner" I do think Trump did well and sounded a lot more sane and a lot more like the Trump I like and admire than he has before. I don't know if he is going to stay on the top of the pile for the whole ride, but he does make the pile more interesting.

So there you have it, my take on the latest Republican debate. In the end I think that the candidates handled themselves well and was glad to see an issue focused discussion instead of a bunch of name calling and mud slinging. People need to keep in mind that it is very possible one of these ten people will be our next president and knowing what they are saying now will help you decide on your vote in the future.

A Thought on the War on Terror...

Saw this on Facebook earlier this evening and it got me to thinking a bit about a few things. However, before I get to involved in telling you all about that, I want to make a few things clear. First, I don't like war. I find war is about the biggest waste of life, money, and resources in the history of humanity and seldom gains us anything. Second, I think we could have avoided a lot of the problems we have today if we would have never stuck our noses in where it really didn't belong. Third, I do believe that there are times when war is necessary. Please keep these in mind.

As I said, I don't like war and I seldom think it is the right answer. However, there are times when war is really the only option we have. While I wish I could go back in time and undo the things we did to get involved, I can't, and this means I have to look at what is, not what I wish was. The fact is that right now Isis presents a very real danger. I know there are some that think this danger is only about Iraq, but they would be wrong.

The thing is, that yes, right now Isis is really only active in Iraq. However, if they gain victory there imagine what that will do for the other terrorist organizations that already have taken action against us. Imagine what a group of extremists actually winning that war over in the middle east would do for nations such as Iran. It's not a good thing.

I wish I had a better answer than war but right now I just don't see one. I really think the only way to deal with Isis is to take off the gloves and just let them have it. I don't like the thought of the toll that will raise. I don't like the thought of how many of my country people have to die in the doing. However, what I like less than that is the thought of another 9/11 or an even more aggressive Iran.

War is ugly, war is hell, war sucks but the only way to win war is to completely commit to destroying the enemy completely. If you look at world history you will know the truth in this. I wish the radicals were reasonable people I wish that we had never started messing around over there, but I also wish there was a cure for cancer. None of those things are going to happen right now and this means we have to choose one super ugly option.

Maybe, just maybe, if we do enough damage to them, maybe if we cost ourselves enough money, maybe then we can look at other options. However, until both sides are willing to see reason, the only choice we really have is complete and total devastation of the enemy.

What is the Proper Role of Government?

Government, there might not be a word that inspires more opinion or passion as this single word. What is it about the concept of government that inspires so much emotion? Why does the idea of government cause so many people to spend so much time and energy trying to understand its place and function in our world?

The answer is pretty self evident when you think about it. We spend so much time trying to understand the role of government because government has a great deal of influence in our lives. While there are some people that would say you can have a world without government, most people seem to want at least some government in their lives. Yet, while many people agree that government is a benefit, there is a great deal of argument over exactly what government should and shouldn't do. Look at the evening news or your face book page and you will see that there are as many views on what the government should look like and what it shouldn't do. While they may not realize it, most people are arguing about one simple question. What is the proper role of government?

Whenever I think about this question, as an American I think about the first three words in the Constitution, we the people. These three words truly do sum up what the role of government should be in the United States. Like Abraham Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address our government is of the people, by the people, for the people and it shouldn't be any other way. In other words, the proper role of government is exactly what we the people decide it is, and we decide what it is through the democratic process of voting.

Is a government by the people a perfect thing? No, people are not perfect and their government won't be either. However, I would much rather live in a nation where I have a voice in what my government is and what my government isn't than to live in a nation where laws are made without my say so. Does this mean I always get things the way I want them? No, but it does mean I have a voice either way and that is better than not being allowed a voice.

In the end, I really do believe that the proper role of government is whatever we decide it is. While this doesn't always make people happy, it does hold to the spirit in which our country was founded, and that is to create a country in which the people determine the course of their government.

Why Conservatives Hate Liberals and Liberals Hate Conservatives Part 4: Why it's Getting Worse, Facts as Bias

Facts as Bias:

Facts are weird little things. While they infer the idea of truth and are in fact true, they can be used to present information in a bias way. In fact the media on both sides has gotten really good at doing this. Every day I stumble across facts that are used to disguise bias and just like everyone else I fall for them. This does not mean that facts are not useful, they are. What it does mean is that you have to be careful of how facts are being used. Below I will give an example of how this is done.

The above picture shows information on how gerrymandering works.  However, while it shows how gerrymandering works it doesn't tell the entire story of gerrymandering in our country. In fact it has a pretty strong bias against conservatives and supports a strong left bias. It does this subtly but the fact is it does and I am going to explain how.

1: Notice the colors?

The people who drew this nifty little chart could have picked any color they wanted. However instead of picking black and white, purple and yellow, or any other combination they choose red and blue. The reason for this is because red and blue are the colors of the Republican and Democrat parties respectively. This turns the article into more than a discussion of how gerrymandering works into a political argument about how red (Republicans) is worse than blue (Democrats) when it comes to gerrymandering.

2: Notice the Title?

The title is "This is the best explanation of gerrymandering you will ever see". What's that tell me as a reader? Why it tells me that the information here will inform me of how gerrymandering works better than any other article so of course I am going to read it. Now, combine that with the subtle bias of the colors used and you can see how again your bias to view Republicans as worse than Democrats is being built.

3: Notice the sub title?

The part below the title says "By simplifying gerrymandering we can see how problematic it really is". Not only have we now inferred that Republicans are worse than Democrats, but we have also said that this article is the best explanation on gerrymandering, and now we are saying that Republicans are the problem! You kind of have to admire just how slick this all works out and I haven't even read the article yet.

Keep in mind that this article does use facts on how gerrymandering works. In fact it is actually a good explanation of how it works and why it is a problem. Yet, while it does succeed there, it also influences a bias quite a bit. If this article had used any other color combination it could have avoided this, but that wouldn't have gotten outraged liberals to look at it now would it?

I know that it can be difficult to see this kind of thing and when we do excuse it as being okay. However the fact is that if we allow our bias to be influenced by media, we can be led astray very easily. I hope you all give this some thought...

Why Conservatives Hate Liberals and Liberals Hate Conservatives Part 4: Why it is Getting Worse

If you are just plugging in you can start at the beginning here. You can read part 2 here, part 3 here.

I was a bit harsh in my last post because I really believe we all need a bit of a wake up call. I really believe if we don't start challenging our own bias, then the purpose behind this series of posts is a waste of time. I know how much bias and cognitive dissonance effects us and if I can't get people to start challenging that, they won't see the following for what it is. Instead of seeing it as a way to point out bias coming from both extremes, they will instead feel like I am attacking or agreeing with their biased view. I am not doing either.

I am not saying I don't have a bias, I do. In fact it was a realization of just how bad my bias had gotten that led me to start this blog to begin with. The problem is that while I admit I have a bias, a lot of people aren't willing to admit it and that's something that needs to change. Bias may be unavoidable to an extent, but what we can control is how much that bias influences our decision making. I know I am fighting an up hill battle,  but I can't sit by and let it happen.

Below I will be posting and discussing memes that I gathered in just a few minutes of browsing various political groups on Facebook. I also collected a few on my feed as part of this project. Before I begin though I want it understood that I am not attacking a particular political stance, I am pointing out bias to the best of my abilities.

Insulting Memes as Bias:

I am going to begin with a bias that I think people tend to notice before most others and that is insulting bias. When you are insulted you automatically get defensive and this leads most people to feeling anger. When we get angry we stop thinking and tend to get reactionary. Guess what? this is exactly what Insulting memes are trying to do. By turning off our brains they work to not only get one side of a debate angry but also work to keep the other side feeling justified in their anger towards differing views. I am going to look at three memes in order to explain how this all works. One meme is kind of neutral, the other two are very partisan.

Us vs. Them Bias:

The picture above is something a lot of people will point to and completely agree with. In fact, it's a good point but I want to point out some flaws in this meme that people may not even be aware of.

1: Which Political Views?

Did you notice while it talks about political views it doesn't actually give any? Instead of focusing on one particular view or a side of views, it simply says "Political Views". Why? Because when something is presented in a general context we automatically assume it's talking about our personal views. For this reason we are going to be inclined to agree with it.

2: Who is Blindly Following?

This meme says "let's blindly follow" but doesn't say who is blindly following. In fact it remains rather obscure in this. Again this works towards the memes favor by working on our individual bias. When I saw this I smiled and said "yeah! that's right people are blind!" without even thinking about who those "blind" people were. I am sure I meant "blind" being anyone who disagreed with me, but do you see my point here?

3: Which Celebrities?

Notice how it says "follow the lead of idiot celebrities".  It doesn't say which celebrities but allows us to infer our own "idiot celebrities" Also notice the word idiot. That is an insult, so again the meme is using our emotions simply to get an emotional response. What is interesting is that both the left and right have their list of "idiot celebrities" which are generally people in the media who have a different point of view.

As you can see this meme is full of things that in no way discourage the formation of bias. Not only that but it seems to exist simply to perpetuate itself by people who see it, get emotional to some degree then re-post it. This gives us a neat feeling of how much smarter we are than those "idiot celebrities" and that is basically the entire point of this meme.

Left vs. Right Bias

I saw this beauty and just groaned. While the things that are wrong with this meme should be kind of self explanatory, I am going to point it out anyway.

1: What is the actual purpose?

The first thing I have to ask myself about this meme is what the purpose behind it is. My guess is that the purpose is to a: infer that those on the right wing are dumb and thus b: infer that people on the left are smarter.

2: What is it's effect?

The only thing this meme is going to do is tick of anyone on the right while allowing the left to feel intellectually superior. In fact this is likely to really tick off someone on the right and ignite an emotional response of some kind. I know this because if it said "keep left" instead of "keep right" I would be kinda pissed off myself.

3: What does this accomplish?

The first thing this meme accomplishes is to piss someone off and make them even less willing to see a differing point of view. Once you have someone emotional they get defensive and when we are defensive we refuse to listen to anything outside our bias.

The second thing this meme accomplishes is keeping left wingers "in check" by inferring that if yo agree with the right on anything you are obviously stupid. Think about that for a second. This meme literally encourages you to not only look at the other side as dumb, but to look at letting go of your own left bias as siding with stupid people.

Finally this meme continues to keep partisan bias and thinking alive and well. It does nothing to encourage any kind of real discussion. It does nothing to even state a position beyond "people on the right are stupid." and that isn't a position, that is intolerant and fascist thinking as far as I am concerned. Honestly the person who took the time to make this meme did far more harm to their side than they did to the right and they probably don't even realize it.

Right vs. Left Bias

Here is another good one that I saw today posted in a right wing group on Facebook. Just like the last couple I am going to point out some things.

1: What is the actual purpose?

The first line says everything you really need to know about this memes purpose. It is intended to do exactly like the last meme I spoke about except instead of left wing this meme is right wing. It is designed to A: create an impassioned those who don't like Hillary and garner support for that cause, and B: Make liberals angry.

2: What is it's effect?

Just like the last meme it's effect is getting people to engage in emotional reaction instead of rational thinking. It doesn't state a view, it doesn't give any information on anything more than Hillary supporters will hate it, and that somehow it is related to "stop Hillary in 2016"

3: What does this accomplish?

Just like the last meme it is designed to accomplish making one group of people angry while giving another group a feeling of superiority for their view points. However unlike the last one it doesn't go as far in keeping a particular segment of thought "in line".

However, while it might not go to keeping a particular side "in line" what this meme does is encourage support for one side based off disrespect for the other. In other words, by making a joke that "Hillary supporters will hate" infers that if you oppose Hillary Clinton the best way to show that support is by disrespecting her and thus all those who would support her.

I could go on for quite a while posting insulting memes and discussing how they propagate our bias, but I am pretty sure people get the point by now. I know that I am unlikely to stop these kind of things from appearing, but hopefully anyone reading this will take time to think before re-posting these kind of memes.

I will be discussing other memes in the coming days, but for now I think I have talked long enough. Give some thought to what I had to say and let me know what you think. Feel free to leave a comment here or on Facebook and I will try to respond fairly quickly.

Why Conservatives Hate Liberals and Liberals Hate Conservatives Part 3: It's Only Getting Worse

I have to admit, out of all the things I am writing about on this topic, this post might be the one I am most afraid to put out there. The first two where pretty easy for me, but this one... Well this one I know I am likely to cause people a lot of cognitive dissonance. I am going to challenge the pre-held belief's of almost anyone who reads this blog and that is going to cause some anger. The problem is that I can't just not say the things that need to be said. I do that, and I don't do a damn thing to change the problems that I see.

I hope you bear with me through this. I will try to be as gentle as possible, but I can't promise you won't get angry or that you won't want to quit reading. I hope you stay with it though, because if you do and you actually hear what I am saying, maybe, just maybe we can start moving forward. Right now not only are we not moving forward as a nation, we are in many ways moving backward. This is a direct result of the fights taking place over virtually every part of our existence. It's not just economic policy, it's not just social policy, it's everything and if we don't stop building the fire we will rip ourselves apart. I don't want that to happen, and I hope you don't either.

With that said I guess it's time to dive into the breach.

We are all part of the problem. Not only are we all part of the problem, we are making that problem worse because we have stopped actually thinking about anything. Where at one time political thought was slow to spread and thus people had time to adjust their thinking, information flows at a pace never seen before in the entirety of human history.

We are assaulted by 24 hour news channels, social media, advertisements, neighbors, friends, family members. Everywhere we go, everywhere we look someone is expressing an opinion and trying to sway the way we think. While no one seems to want to admit to it, the fact is this is effecting every single one of us! It's not just "stupid" people who can't think for themselves, it's also "smart" people and rich people and poor people. It doesn't matter your level of education (because guess what that was propaganda too) or how much life experience you have had, the fact is your opinion is being directed by someone else. This someone else isn't a single person, or even a group of people, this someone else is the mob.

The mob has taken over any kind of meaningful debate and replaced it with farce and pseudo facts. The mob is forwarding hate for conservatives, forwarding hate for liberals, and we are all buying into it. What really sucks is you and I and everyone else are just helping the mob do it. Whenever you post a half thought out opinion of Facebook, whenever you talk about what the news anchor on MSNBC or FOX had to say about the president, whenever you use terms like "idiot conservative" or "blind liberal" or hundreds of other derogatory terms you are helping the mob continue. I know that's hard to hear. I know you are sitting there thinking "well maybe everyone else is part of the mob, but I think for myself". You don't.

This is not to say you don't have an educated opinion. In fact if you are reading this blog my guess is your opinion is educated. What I am saying though is your education has become faulty. The fact is that even the best of us fall prey to the inflammatory news story on Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc. The fact is that we as a population have become reliant on Facebook as our primary source of news on current event. The fact is that we have all engaged in confirmation bias on such a high level that I really dont' know if we can stop it from happening now. I hope we can and I am writing this post because I want us to be able to, but I don't know if people can handle the truth about things.

I can, and will in the next post, spend time showing you exactly how this all works. However, before I do any of that. I have to make sure your ready to challenge your own opinions. I have to make sure your going into the information I am about to give you with a truly open mind. I don't mean going in looking to prove your pre-conceptions right. I mean a truly honest open mind that is going to honestly consider what I say even when it makes you uncomfortable. If you can't do that, if you can't accept that idea that maybe just possibly you are not the free thinker you want to think you are... well then this is a waste of time.

The thing Is I don't believe it is. I believe that most people want to have the facts right.I believe most people are willing to let go of their opinion when they are given sufficient proof to do so. However, until we face ourselves and admit "hey maybe I am not near the free thinking educated individual I claim to be" well, this battle is lost. Don't let the mob win, don't let misinformation win. Stick with me just a little bit longer. Just hang with me for a couple more posts and I promise you will see what I mean. DO we have a deal?

Why Conservatives Hate Liberals and Liberals Hate Conservatives Part 2: The Cause

In my last post I discussed a bit about how conservatives and liberals are made. While it was a bit long winded, I felt it was a very important place to begin in order to have a fuller understanding of this next part where I will talk about the cause of the hate between liberals and conservatives. There is no one singular reason why a conservative hates liberals or why a liberal hates conservatives, people just don't work that way. So instead of trying to give one easy answer I am going to look at a number of factors.

Before I begin to get to in depth in this I want something clearly understood. Most people who claim to be either conservative or liberal are just people who care enough about their country to have and express an opinion. While sometimes they are wrong, this isn't because their entire political philosophy is bad. In fact most of the time there is a bit of right in even the most extreme argument. This series of posts is not about making one side seem better than the other. It is about trying to get us to look past the anger and start coming up with constructive dialogue and solving very immediate problems.

Before we can start solving problems we have to understand the cause of a problem. We know the problem is that we are not listening to each other, but I don't know if many people have ever thought of the why beyond "they just won't listen to reason". The fact is, there are many reasons we aren't listening to each other and I am going to discuss some of those now. I hope that if you are reading this you hear what I have to say an give it some serious thought. If not, then I hope somewhere someone says something that gives you pause.

Cognitive Dissonance

I realize it may seem like this is a big fancy term, but in reality all cognitive dissonance means is you are being confronted with information that is different than something you already believe. If there is one single thing that causes us not to listen to each other, cognitive dissonance is probably the biggest culprit. To show you how this works I am going to write a list of several things people believe. I want you to pay attention to how each one of the following statements makes you feel and remember that for later.

Evolution is a fact - People evolved from apes

The world is only 12,000 years old.

White people are immigrants to the United States

Trickle down economics work

Socialism is a good thing

Gay people are sexually deviant

Belief in god is stupid

Climate change is being caused by people's activities

Extreme Islam is no different than extreme right wing Christianity

Ronald Reagan was one of the best presidents ever

How did each of those statements  make you feel? What was your thought when you read each one? Did you feel a bit of anger rise at all? Did you nod your head in agreement to any of those statements? Did you feel like your point of view was not being given fair weight? Did you feel like your belief had been justified in some way?

My guess is you felt a bit of all of that and more when you read through the list. The reason you felt all those things is because it is a pretty broad cross section of many different belief systems that are part of our national narrative right now. Some people believe one thing and other people believe something completely different. This is because everyone of us has our own belief structure. when our belief structure is challenged it makes us feel uncomfortable and even angry. This feeling is cognitive dissonance and it affects us a lot when we discuss things such as politics and religion.

The Cycle of Cognitive Dissonance

Because we hold our political values as extremely important, when we run into any information that is contrary to what we know it makes us feel threatened. When we feel threatened it is our instinctual reaction to feel safe again. When it comes to political argument we tend to have a fairly predictable reaction as follows.

I have a belief and state that belief

Someone says that belief is wrong

I don't like the way that feels so I tell them they are wrong

They don't like the way that feels so they tell me I am wrong again

I feel even more threatened and get more passionate about defending my opinion

They feel more threatened and get more passionate about defending their opinion

If you want proof of how this works, go to face book or any other forum where there is political debate and watch how quickly normally rational people fall into anger and name calling. This is a real thing an this is a big part of why we wind up in shouting matches instead of having meaningful discussions on issues we care about. Yet, while cognitive dissonance is a big part of it, it's not the only part of it. Next we will talk about confirmation bias.

Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is defined as the tendency to search for, interpret, or recall information in a way that confirms one's beliefs. This means that when we are looking for information and already have a belief (or bias) we tent to look for things that confirm that bias either in our own memories or in other sources such as media outlets. Not only do we look for things that confirm our pre-held bias, we also tend to ignore any information that may tell us our bias is wrong. While people hate admitting to it, everyone engages in confirmation bias on some level.

How Confirmation Bias Works

Confirmation bias does not mean you are actually wrong it just means you look to confirm your pre-held notions and belief. The problem is that if you deny the fact you engage in confirmation bias, you will never be able to look at any information that either isn't completely new to you or in contradiction of that bias. I am going to use the argument over union state vs. right to work states I see on Facebook fairly often to give an example of how this works.

The basic argument between union vs. right to work is as follows:

Pro union people state that unions are a benefit because they lead to higher wages, better conditions for workers, and help act as a voice against corporate greed. In fact they have proof that union states have higher wages and they are right.

On the other side right to work people claim that unions cause unemployment, stifle innovation, and force business owners to do things against their interest. Just like the union folks they have proof of this and they are right as well.

This means that when people are arguing their points, there is actually factual information to back their claim up. However, because both sides are operating out of confirmation bias, we seldom actually see the full story. Not only do we not see the whole story, but because confirmation bias tends to operate on simple principles of right and wrong, we tend to believe the other side is lying about their information. Even when a union or right to work supporter provides factual evidence, our confirmation bias won't allow us to see it as anything but a lie.

As you can see confirmation bias is another big part of why people argue so often and seem to never change their minds. It's not because they are dumb or don't think about things, it's because we tend not to look at things that don't already conform to our particular bias. This creates many situations in which all sides of an argument have some facts to back up their claims but seldom leads to anyone actually agreeing with one another. While cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias are a big part of the cause, there are some other factors as well.

Other Factors

Cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias may play the biggest roles in our inability to see other points of view, but they are not the whole story. While I could (and just might) write an entire book on the cause of this problem, I also want to keep things somewhat easy for people to read right now. This means that while the following things deserve a great deal of attention, I will only briefly touch on them for now.

Out of the other factors that play a role in our current narrative, It is my feeling that three in particular play a bigger role than many of the others. These three factors are ego, peer pressure, and personal conviction. Before I begin on these I want to once again state I am not saying any of these are innately bad things, I am only saying they play a part in the gulf of misunderstanding between us all. All three of these things can be positive, but they can also be negative and I am going to focus on how they negatively influence us right now.

Ego

Ego is probably the kind of this triad and it makes sense. After all part of our personality requires us to have a sense of self. Our political belief's are a part of that self, so it follows that we would have at least some of our ego invested in our political thoughts. When you combine our ego with both cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, the natural result of being presented with a differing opinion is feeling like we are being attacked. It's not always true, in fact quite often it's not true at all, but that doesn't mean we don't feel that way. When we feel attacked we are not going to be receptive to new information because we actually stop thinking when we feel threatened.

Peer Pressure

While Ego without a doubt plays a part, another factor that can't be ignored is the role of peer pressure. I remember one time I was on Facebook and I stated the guy on Duck Dynasty was well within his rights to say what he said in a magazine article. I didn't agree with that and made that clear in my post. However, while I was in no way defending the content of what he said I got attacked by several people who disagreed with me. When this happened I felt hurt and a little angry. How can people who I thought were open minded of things attack me for defending a persons right to free speech? While I hate to admit it I felt an urge to backtrack on what I had said and try to get those people attacking me to like me again.

I am normally someone that has little problem with argument and doesn't succumb to peer pressure, but in this case I can't deny it was there and it did effect what I said on Facebook for days after I made the post. If I felt that way and am someone who normally doesn't feel an urge to succumb to peer pressure, I can't imagine how it would feel to be someone who does to be in a similar situation. After a person experiences something like that it is completely understandable why they would hesitate to do it again.

This leads to people actually voicing agreement with positions they actually don't agree with. Not only that, but in order to keep their friends, they often become even louder voices for a particular point of view. It's easy to see how peer pressure affects political discussion, specially when politics is already an emotional topic for most people.

Personal Conviction
It might seem like personal conviction should top the list, but the fact is personal conviction is a combination of everything above. In fact one could say that the sum of our political ideology is our personal conviction, but it also plays a role in our current climate of anger. The reason for this comes down to the fact that there are just some things we as people are not willing to compromise on or accept a different point of view about. You can see personal conviction at work whenever you talk to anybody who is on the extreme of any political argument. While that is the easiest place to see it at work, conviction proliferates most of our political discussion in the country.

This isn't to say having personal conviction is a bad thing, in fact conviction has led to many wonderful things in our world, but conviction can also be dangerous. There was a guy in Germany who had a lot of conviction and his name was Adolph Hitler. Conversely there was a guy named Martin Luther King Jr. and he also had a lot of conviction. The big problem with conviction is that we often stand on it without ever giving any real thought to either the consequences or correctness of our conviction to begin with. When this force enters into political argument the chances of changing your mind become almost non existent. This is not always a good thing.

Putting it all Together

As you can see, the cause of the anger between liberals and conservatives is a complex web of belief's and ideals that are reinforced by several different things. The good news is that we can actually understand the cause and this means that if we as individuals take responsibility in the wider world, we can create a positive change. However, before that change can happen each and every one of us has to stop and admit to ourselves that things like cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, and more play a part in how we react to differing points of view. Once we do that, then we can start changing how we react on an individual basis.

If you have gotten this far I really want to thank you. I now this has been a lot of reading. I wish it didn't have to be, I wish I could get these concepts across in a short five hundred word essay and create the change I want to see, but the fact is that is not how this kind of thing works. While I wish I could say I was done and ready to move onto a new subject, the fact is that There is still a lot of ground to cover on this subject. If we are going to change the way things work in our world right now, we have to get away from the idea that it will be a quick fix. It won't be, it's going to take a lot of work. If you made it to the end of this post, congratulations, you are taking a step toward fixing the problem. However, while we have done some good work, the problem isn't getting fixed today, in fact it is only getting worst and that is what I will cover in the next post.

Why Conservatives Hate Liberals and Liberals Hate Conservatives Part 1: How we are Made

Every single day while I do my thing on Facebook, I see a large number of posts that seem dedicated to spreading animosity between liberals and conservatives. Posts claiming that Obama is the equivalent of Stalin or that the Republicans are trying to destroy women populate my page daily. Consequently this has led to a culture war that is getting worse each day. Where at one time you could have fairly frank discussions about political issues on Facebook and other social media outlets, it seems like that has become more and more rare. Because I don't think this is a good thing I have spent some time thinking about why it happens. I figure if I can figure out why it happens and then share that, there is a chance that the culture of Facebook can change.

The reason I feel this is so important is because right now the U.S. is deadlocked between conservative and liberal hysteria and if something doesn't defuse it soon I fear we will rip our country apart. I don't want to see this happen so I feel like I need to say something. This post is not about assigning blame to either side or anyone in particular. In fact this post is an attempt to get people to understand their own behavior in a hope that they will take some form of responsibility and change the way they engage in debate.

I realize that I am not a perfect person. In fact up until about a year and a half ago or so I was quite happy to keep the culture war going. I knew I was right, I knew the other side was wrong, and I figured if I shouted long enough and hard enough they would eventually capitulate to my rightness. I don't know when exactly I realized I was part of the problem, but thankfully I did. Since then I have worked very hard to keep myself from falling into the many traps that are out there that keeps us arguing instead of working toward a solution. During that time there are a few things I have noticed that keep the culture war escalating and I feel like it's time we start addressing them as a nation. The following is simply one man's attempt to get people back to talking instead of attempting to shout louder than the other person.

To really understand why liberals and conservatives have a hard time getting along, we first have to understand how a liberal or conservative is made. We have to understand how people become liberals and conservatives because that is the first step in understanding their opinion. Ignoring things like background, schooling, exposure to mass media, and other factors only serves to keep us angry at each other instead of working toward a common cause.

Family, Location, and Peer Pressure

While there are exceptions to the rule, most people carry on the political view of not only their parents but of their larger social group. If you have ever looked at the history of political opinion across the nation you will notice that for the most part any particular area tends to favor one political view over another. In New England most everybody is liberal while in the south most everybody is conservative. This alone is a huge factor in shaping our political opinion. While yes there are people who "buck the trend" this is the exception and not the rule. 

We all have a desire to belong. That is part of human nature and that is why peer pressure works so well on most people. When it comes to political opinion, peer pressure plays just a large of role as family does. For example if a majority of your friends are liberal and you say something that sounds supportive of conservative ideas there is a good chance you will get laughed at if not out right attacked in some way. While at first you might continue voicing your different opinion, if you continue to be ridiculed for it you eventually quiet down. Not only will you quiet down, but you will start to voice the "acceptable" opinion along with every one else. Over time, if you continue agreeing with people, you will eventually start agreeing with them as well.

This doesn't happen because people are bad, it happens because it is our base nature to enforce conformity in our social groups. This also isn't to say that people hold a particular point of view because they were to weak minded to disagree with popular opinion, peer pressure is a very strong influence in our lives. Trying to say it isn't is like trying to say gravity doesn't keep our feet on the ground.

This is not to say people are helpless to the dogma of the area they grew up in. I myself grew up in a family that was incredibly conservative. Not only that, I grew up in an area that was very conservative. On top of those two factors the dominant religion of my area was also extremely conservative. Yet somehow I wound up being a liberal while most of my friends grew up maintaining the conservative tradition of their family and region. I don't think I am "special" or "better" because of this, I just recognize that none of us are helpless to any particular point of view.


The Role of Eduation and Media

Along with family and the like, another key component of how political ideals are formed is through the information we recieve. As we go through the process of education we learn about many different things and one of the things we learn about is how our government works and the history of our nation. During this time we learn about the basic functions of our government, the role of the electorate and the history of our government. While I doubt it is intentional, teachers can't help but slip a bit of bias into this educational curriculum and this bias tends to reflect the political bias of the people who live in the area of the school.

This bias in education is not confined to one particular political view or another. In fact most bias in education tends to reflect the bias of the population in the area of the school. For example, if you live in a conservative area, chances are you will get a conservative bias taught by your teachers. I know I did. However, while yes, a conservative teacher is likely to teach a conservative bias, a liberal teach is going to do so as well. Again this isn't intentional, it's just the fact that we are people and we have opinions.

Along with the bias we learn during our education, we also learn a bias from the media. We recieve our information for a staggering variety of sources. There are news channels on TV, newspapers, periodicals, blogs, social media and more. All of this combines together to help us form an opinion. The thing is that other than national news outlets, most of the information we recieved comes from local news papers and word of mouth. While that has changed a bit because of things like cable televison and the internet, the fact is most of us still form a majoirty of our opinion from the sources closest to our homes.

What this means is that in a liberal area, the liberal news papers will carry a liberal bias. This isn't because they are horrible evil people who only want to present one point of view, it's because their readers only want a particular point of view. While there are rules that journalists follow, those rules have seen a lot of errosion over the last twenty or so years (which I will go into later) which of course has led to even more bias in our news sources.

While I could probably write a book on every little nuance of how we develop political opinions during our life, I figure at this point I have given enough information to create a basic understanding. The combination of family, location, and peer pressure combined with what we are taught and the information we recieve is a large part of how we form our political thoughts. Because of this people tend to share common values and ideals in a give geographical area. This is not wrong or bad, this is simply how things work. I will leave you with this to think about for now. The next part of this series of posts will be about why we can't get along.

A thought on Free Speech and violence

I believe that we have a right to assemble whenever we want, for whatever we want. I believe that we have a right to do this and don't need the permission of authorities in order to do this. That right is a fundamental right for a democratic country and is one of the most effective way we as citizens have to tell our government when we want things changed.

While I believe in this right, I do not believe that right extends to violent actions no matter how justified they may be. I do not condone violence. While I am happy to see people motivated enough to start acting against the abuses of our government, I am saddened that people take a great tradition of protest and ruin it with their own selfish need to act violently. Those who act with violence are an enemy to not only the police, but to our process and quite frankly your immature actions sicken me.

Is our system perfect? No, but name another place in the world where you have the freedom to stand on any street corner and protest any little thing you want to. Are there to many restrictions to this at the moment? I believe there are and I refuse to accept the idea that I need a permit to engage in protests. I do however believe that authorities are well within their rights to make sure any and all demonstrations remain safe for both the public at large and the protesters themselves. When you take an aggressive action against a police officer and that police officer responds with force, this is -not- police brutality. This is you being restrained because you have proven to be a threat to everyone around you.

I have participated in several protests in my life. I do this because I believe that is an important part of the democratic process. However, while I have been in several protests, not once have I acted with violence toward the police. Not once have I done anything more than shield my wife while I was beat with batons and pepper sprayed because of the actions of other morons a the same protest (I even got my picture on the front page of the Washington Post the next day). However, once the crowd had calmed down the police did not continue their actions. Instead they went back to quietly observing our actions and allowing us to participate in our protest even though we didn't have a permit.

I understand many people are angry with the state of our nation right now. I am angry as well. I even understand the impulse to commit violence in the name of justice. However, I restrain myself from doing so because the moment I allow myself the luxury of animal instinct, I become no better than the system I oppose. I do not believe violence is ever the best answer and I never believe it is the only answer. I believe that acting as a responsible citizen and member of the electorate is and always will be the best way to promote positive change.