Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

pnas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 316 posts

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#111

Post by Mezzie »

dorchadas wrote: post #102
brightball wrote: post #84

The polarization is much worse on the left side of the isle. I’d always observed it on the internet with what comes across as belligerent hate of anything done by a conservative, but this recent poll really brings home just how far the brainwashing has gone. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/over-70-of-young... If your political beliefs prevent you from associating with somebody because you have labeled the…

> The polarization is much worse on the left side of the isle. It's interesting, and I wonder if this has more to do with who controls the discourse the majority of us see. I lived in and grew up in a deep red area. Like, literally, in 2016 and 2020 the state was called for Trump before voting had even ended across it (multiple time zones). I had to actively hide my leftist views from most people, as I immediately go…

It's both.

I'm from a purple area and have half a foot in red land and half a foot in blue land. No matter where I am, I hide more about myself than I used to.

If I'm in a left/blue/urban type space, nobody gets to know that I converted to Christianity as an adult, that I disagree with intersectionality as a lens outside of a legal context, that I think some of the gender activism is crazy, that language has a science to it and we should defer to it, that I shoot as a hobby and think the 2nd Amendment should include digital weaponry, etc.

If I'm in a right/red/rural type space, nobody gets to know that I'm a lesbian who hates femininity, that my Christianity is heretical/liberal, that I think transgenderism is real, etc.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#112

Post by buffalobuffalo »

I think one way to massively reduce polarization in the US at least is to mix up the parties. That is to say, get left leaning people into the republican party and right leaning people into the democratic party. (just having them vote in the primaries would be sufficient). This would at least dampen the political effect of extreme polarization.

The funny thing is that from a game theory perspective, it seems like it would be in both parties’ interest to encourage this. If you push your supporters into the opposing party for the primary but they don’t follow suit, your voter base/platform can remain static but your opponent’s voter base/platform shifts towards you. This would make it easier to pass legislation you want.

Allow this to continue and eventually both parties would have to encourage this until we reach nash equilibrium with both parties being fairly heterogeneous.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#113

Post by DharmaPolice »

grover35 wrote: post #91
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

I'm American and I can't help but think many of you just lack social skills. It's very convenient to think that everyone's hyper-sensitive and there's nothing you could do to change that, but usually people are pretty receptive to just about anything as long as you respect them. Avoid leading/gotcha questions, don't smirk, appear to genuinely listen and seek to understand the other person, resist the urge to tool on…

I think in person it's easier to adopt this approach because there's a lot more context available. If you ask someone a question in person you can look them in the eye and they can assess if you're being genuine. Online there is a tendency to second guess what the person really means, especially if they're a stranger (which they often are) and then to assume the worst.

The problem is compounded in forums with a really wide general audience with potentially very little common ground. Not only do you not have shared assumptions you can rely on (e.g. we all believe in free-speech, we all believe that the moon landing happened) but you often don't build up any kind of track record or rapport with someone so you know what they mean by a particular (ambiguous) comment. It's the opposite problem to the echo chamber.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#114

Post by TomSwirly »

grover35 wrote: post #91
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

I'm American and I can't help but think many of you just lack social skills. It's very convenient to think that everyone's hyper-sensitive and there's nothing you could do to change that, but usually people are pretty receptive to just about anything as long as you respect them. Avoid leading/gotcha questions, don't smirk, appear to genuinely listen and seek to understand the other person, resist the urge to tool on…

> usually people are pretty receptive to just about anything as long as you respect them.

Non-American here.

I lived in the United States for over thirty years. My experience was different.

I lost a lot of friends in the last ten years, because they started posting completely ridiculous, crazy stuff and were completely defensive of even the most reasonable objections.

I'd put up with "Obama is a Muslim" for a long time, but then it started to escalate. People would get hostile when you mentioned that there were records showing otherwise. After the election, some people become convinced that Michelle Obama was in fact a transgender man and let me hear all about it.

And you know, it's hard not to get a little pissed off about such blatant lies, hmm?

A long-time friend of mine started posting about Sandy Hook being a hoax - that the school had never existed. I pointed out that a friend-of-a-friend of mine had lost two children there, and my friend just went ballistic and started calling me the most unbelievable names, "Do your homework!" I unfriended her. You could see her get more unhinged on other people's pages and unfriended, and I haven't heard anything from her in years.

And now we have terrible lies about medical data, and again, people become incredibly defensive. At least two acquaintances accused me of being a pharmaceutical company shill! (I've never worked anything remotely like that.)

Sorry, it's not just "politeness" - a significant portion of Americans just went off the rails in the last decade.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#115

Post by [deleted] »

grover35 wrote: post #91
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

I'm American and I can't help but think many of you just lack social skills. It's very convenient to think that everyone's hyper-sensitive and there's nothing you could do to change that, but usually people are pretty receptive to just about anything as long as you respect them. Avoid leading/gotcha questions, don't smirk, appear to genuinely listen and seek to understand the other person, resist the urge to tool on…

[deleted]

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#116

Post by claytongulick »

ilikecakeandpie wrote: post #87
brightball wrote: post #84

The polarization is much worse on the left side of the isle. I’d always observed it on the internet with what comes across as belligerent hate of anything done by a conservative, but this recent poll really brings home just how far the brainwashing has gone. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/over-70-of-young... If your political beliefs prevent you from associating with somebody because you have labeled the…

> If your political beliefs prevent you from associating with somebody because you have labeled them so firmly as to write them off entirely as a person, you have jumped the shark and become the problem. If someone is having their bodily autonomy threatened by legislation pushed and passed by a political party and a choice for potential partner actively supports and votes for those people to gain or retain power, it'…

I feel like your comment supports the parent's point.

Lack of tolerance is the issue.

Which is ironic, given that traditionally the left has been known as being much more tolerant than the right.

I don't see that anymore, online or with the people I know personally.

My family has split over it. My brother refuses to ever speak to my father again because he believes my father voted for Trump.

The excuses I hear are similar to your comment, but mostly boil down to:

1) take a wedge issue

2) build a strawman around it and a dramatic case that doesn't reflect reality

3) somehow make it personal and claim victimhood

4) use that victim status to demonize the "attacker"

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#117

Post by [deleted] »

o5ira wrote: post #103
johnisgood wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already gave up our agency to make our own decisions in many areas of life. The Government does it for us.

In my experience, Government imposes far fewer limitations on my life than the Market does. It determines that I must work to live, who I can work for, what sort of home and food I can have, etc.

[deleted]

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#118

Post by germinalphrase »

ridiculous_leke wrote: post #95
idontwantthis wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

60% of Republicans believe that Biden did not win the election. If you believe the presidency has been stolen by a conspiracy then violence is the only recourse remaining. This is not a handful of extremists. This is the predominant view.

What's the source of that stat?

In May, the pollster Frank Luntz reported that "more than two-thirds of Republicans believe that the election was stolen”.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#119

Post by edmcnulty101 »

The media calling January 6th an 'insurrection' is a perfect example of the problem.

It's pure sensationalism.

There were no guns, there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection, the 4 people who died were all protestors, mostly from being dumbasses.

Clearly those people who damaged the capitol should be punished, just like the Black Lives Matter protesters who damaged the Foley Federal Building.

But calling it an INSURRECTION is just pure disingenuous sensationalism by the media.

What story will make the media more money:

A protest that got very heated? Or an insurrection?

And of course the more extreme opponents of either side will seize on the identity politics and propagate this narrative and we continue down the path of polarization.

I have no idea how to fix this issue of media propaganda other than teaching people statistics and critical thinking, but that starts with education from an early age. I don't know if most people even have the time to research alternative views so they just trust their news sources, which worked up until the past decade(?) or so.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#120

Post by zksmk »

kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned yet a key (admittedly not only) part in making the US so polarized: first past the post voting system which inevitably leads to a two party system. Good luck having nuance in that system. It literally pits people against each other in two umbrella teams. The internet's echo chamber mechanic has only amplified this.

People need to challenge their own beliefs more often. You vote Democrat? Whatever. Who do you vote for in the primaries? Nobody cares... they should.

It might open the eyes to the foundations of disagreement not being dehumanizing.

Post reply on HN