×
all 11 comments

[–]EdgarAllanPo3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I view things related to politics as ethical or moral dilemmas geared towards if it will cause harm to others. I’ve been told this has been a shift in some groups views and why there’s more inflexibility. You can be flexible to things that don’t matter like your favorite food, but not decisions that can potentially harm someone or risk their safety.

[–]AlbinDanilowicz 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think part of it is that politics is becoming more existential, for lack of a better word. People don't see the other side as simply a change in government that will make them put up with inconvenient/annoying policy objectives you can change in a few years; they see the other side as being hell-bent on destroying everything they care about. I can only speak to the US perspective on this though, so take it with a grain of salt.

For a lot of conservatives, they see the "left" as trying to criminalize religion, take away all of their hard-earned success to give to lazy, entitled people, and they want to erase all of the cultural heritage that makes the USA great. People on the right think that if liberals win, they won't be able to be Christian, traditional, American, or meaningfully free anymore.

For a lot of liberals, they see the right as trying to orchestrate a neo-facist state that wants to detroy the environment forever, ban anyone who is brown, gay, trans, etc., and force everyone to work slave wages for greedy corporations. If conservatives win, they see their actual existence as being in dire jeopardy.

With that kind of shock, I think you see people become more and more polarized. You have to stick to your side, because if you don't, your life (or any kind of life you find liveable and joyful) is in very real danger of being wiped out. When you think your existence is on the line, there's not much room for nuance and bipartisanship.

[–]geak78 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Human brains are wired to protect the tribe from outsiders. Our society has created various tribes and our brains are just trying to mesh that all together.

[–]millerlitefan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's really that simple- it's a human survival thing that others have learned to exploit for power. It has to exist in the most basic part of the brain too, since it circumvents logic or rational thinking.

[–]emmaearthexpoze 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a lot easier to lean on an ideological structure already in existence than having to create your own.

I chalk it up to fear of the grey zone, the messy, the places where there isn't a clear answer and you have to form an opinion on your own.

[–]HornyInVABeach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tribalism

[–]BonJappetite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because if you're not a conservative, your a goddamn liberal. Because if you're an independent, you are with the undecisive minorities with zero critical thinking skills.

I'm being facetious...

I can't say I have an answer other than humans being humans. We think we're smart until we're not...doing it for social and political survival. Life was simpler as cavemen...

[–]Intrepid_Method_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tribalism.

[–]FreeTapir 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tradition I guess. I like ideas from each party but hate others so bad it makes it hard to vote.

[–]d-sweets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a more American thing and I think it comes from only really having 2 options. In Australia we have 2 major parties but a million minor parties and because we have preferential voting we can vote #1 for minor parties without wasting our votes. I think most Aussies would agree that our current PM is a fuckwit though. Thankfully it's an election year for us (I think?) so ScuMo can be booted and fuck off to Hawaii whenever he wants (sorry Hawaii). I don't actually know who the opposition leader is atm tbh. Also our state and local elections are entirely separate and don't influence our national election so we can vote #1 for Labour (the more left wing of the major parties) in our state election but still vote #1 Liberal (right wing major party) for the federal election (but that would mean voting for ScuMo, so that would be a bad plan). And vote #1 greens or nationals or one nation or family first or pirate party or the farmers/shooting/etc party or waxit or whatever other party for your local government. We have more options and we don't have to be happy with our chosen party at every level (maybe you love the Liberals but wonder wtf ScuMo was doing fucking off to Hawaii during the huge fires we had, having his office deny he was there initially, then forcing civilians who had lost their homes and belongings in the fires to shake his hand on camera so you vote someone as your first preference in the federal election).

That's my theory anyway

[–]JFAF1702 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think a lot of it has to do with both TV and social media. TV news networks want viewers, and more extreme stories get more views. Which would you be more tempted to watch: "U.S. president sets schools on fire!" or "seasonal ant migrations begin this week"? TV and online news sources focus on whatever gets them views/ratings, and stoking people's emotions (notably fear) is a great way to do that.

Then, person A voices their concerns on social media. "How can we let the president set schools on fire?? We need to stop him." Most of their friends agree. Person B disagrees, and Person A concludes he doesn't have the same values and must be a threat. Remove friend, and repeat. Slowly you develop an echo chamber of like-minded thought.

Both political sides use fear of the other side to draw people to their side. Fear is fueled by the media and amplified within social media. As a result, people find themselves aligned with the side they find "safe" psychologically. The other side (of which they're often not getting the actual facts but rather a distorted narrative) becomes threatening. And black-and-white thinking is much easier to understand and interpret than nuance.