Why the usa is a clusterfuck.

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...b718/1539107467397/hidden_tribes_report-2.pdf

You can skip to the conclusions from page 138 if you don't have the time.

Clearly some people on both sides of the polarisation are loving the current situation, but you are not the majority, you do not represent the majority and you are both responsible for the deplorable state of US politics.

Now you are both a self fulfilling vicious circle.

How do the majority get their country back?
 

halcyondays

Worshipped Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Posts
6,361
Media
2
Likes
10,359
Points
158
Location
US
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Because our species is a clusterfuck of tribal behavior. It's instinctual.

The human population is indoctrinated into an almost infinite number of tribes large and small. Political, religious, business, educational, regional, local--even schools and sports teams become archrivals.

As a species it's our instinct to learn. Our minds are open to cultural indoctrination of all kinds and change little over time."The battle for the hearts and minds of the people" is a battle over indoctrination. The reassurance of belonging to an in-group creates the most appalling behavior we've seen in human history.

Locally and globally the endless cycle of empire vs. Balkanization is never going to end until our species evolves into something else.

It's not in our nature to embrace unity outside the in-group to which we belong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nomadic

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Because our species is a clusterfuck of tribal behavior. It's instinctual.

That's why we need to think in terms of society as a whole, the community, rather than just the tribe or individual.

If only there were a political group with that kind of perspective. :rolleyes:
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Because our species is a clusterfuck of tribal behavior. It's instinctual.

The human population is indoctrinated into an almost infinite number of tribes large and small. Political, religious, business, educational, regional, local--even schools and sports teams become archrivals.

As a species it's our instinct to learn. Our minds are open to cultural indoctrination of all kinds and change little over time."The battle for the hearts and minds of the people" is a battle over indoctrination. The reassurance of belonging to an in-group creates the most appalling behavior we've seen in human history.

Locally and globally the endless cycle of empire vs. Balkanization is never going to end until our species evolves into something else.

It's not in our nature to embrace unity outside the in-group to which we belong.

But the two tribes at either end are only 14% of the people. The disengaged are nearly double on their own.

Why are the 14% extreme tribes dictating the agenda and atmosphere for the 86%?

Why do the 8% extreme right and the 6% extreme left presume to count everyone generally on the left or right side as agreeing with their positions. The majority don't. The majorities are not represented by these people.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,945
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
But the two tribes at either end are only 14% of the people. The disengaged are nearly double on their own.

Why are the 14% extreme tribes dictating the agenda and atmosphere for the 86%?

Why do the 8% extreme right and the 6% extreme left presume to count everyone generally on the left or right side as agreeing with their positions. The majority don't. The majorities are not represented by these people.

Reality is the minority - left or right - is the most motivated to vote, force change, enact a point of view. They, the more extreme elements ALWAYS, 100% of the time vote. Rain, hail, sleet or snow, they vote. The mainstream, the roughly 86% mentioned don't vote in as high a percentage of numbers. They come out, maybe, they are motivated once in a while, maybe, it doesn't move the needle for them. It has been this way for decades, social media has made it worse, I see no improvement coming. A failure of public education is a big part of it. Until that changes, nothing else will.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Reality is the minority - left or right - is the most motivated to vote, force change, enact a point of view. They, the more extreme elements ALWAYS, 100% of the time vote. Rain, hail, sleet or snow, they vote. The mainstream, the roughly 86% mentioned don't vote in as high a percentage of numbers. They come out, maybe, they are motivated once in a while, maybe, it doesn't move the needle for them. It has been this way for decades, social media has made it worse, I see no improvement coming. A failure of public education is a big part of it. Until that changes, nothing else will.

The media think the extreme is the more newsworthy, will get the most likes, the most attention.

I also think that identity politics has given some people to presume that their opinion can be given as that shared by everyone assumed to be in their tribe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6inchcock

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
I also think that identity politics has given some people to presume that their opinion can be given as that shared by everyone assumed to be in their tribe.

So you're saying, now *everyone * is starting to act like an old white guy! :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: keenobserver

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,945
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The media think the extreme is the more newsworthy, will get the mrost likes, the most attention.

I also think that identity politics has given some people to presume that their opinion can be given as that shared by everyone assumed to be in their tribe.

The extreme always gets more new coverage. The mantra in journalism, especially in the old print days was "If it bleeds, it leads." The extreme, being by definition "different" gets more attention because it is new, hence newsworthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drifterwood

Chrysippus

Superior Member
Joined
May 30, 2015
Posts
4,566
Media
0
Likes
3,826
Points
148
Location
Oregon (United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The extreme always gets more new coverage. The mantra in journalism, especially in the old print days was "If it bleeds, it leads." The extreme, being by definition "different" gets more attention because it is new, hence newsworthy.

But now we don’t have journalism. We have programs of three or four commentators from different sides (talking heads, spokesmen, surrogates, or ‘experts’) with a media interlocutor whose job it is to encourage a logomachy (sustained conflict) between members of the panel. It’s just a game of ping pong. I turn these programs off.

Or we have Bill Maher, Hannity, Carlson, and for a real laugh, ‘’Judge’ Jeanine and Chelsea Handler..

And then we have a president who is an inveterate, habitual and shameless liar.

Gone are the days of a presentation of facts synthesized into a report.

It gets harder and harder for me to find facts unfiltered through bias, opinion and shameless lies.
 

halcyondays

Worshipped Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Posts
6,361
Media
2
Likes
10,359
Points
158
Location
US
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
But the two tribes at either end are only 14% of the people. The disengaged are nearly double on their own.

Why are the 14% extreme tribes dictating the agenda and atmosphere for the 86%?

Why do the 8% extreme right and the 6% extreme left presume to count everyone generally on the left or right side as agreeing with their positions. The majority don't. The majorities are not represented by these people.

Two reasons why. First is that a tiny percentage of people in the extremes control 99% of the wealth and that wealth buys elections here in the US.

The second is that as an instinctual tribal species humans accept and desire the leadership of chieftains. Every tribe has one. As tribes became larger the chiefs became monarchs. Their power was mythologized as a divine right all the way up to and including the monarch or emperor being considered divine. Everyone downstream is indoctrinated to accept their place in the social hierarchy. Like any tribal species humans feel safe knowing their place in the social order.

When monarchies fall tribes and nations have civil wars and the monarch is replaced by someone else with a different title but similar power. The Roman Republic didn't last very long. The English Civil War replaced a monarch with Cromwell. The French Revolution replaced a monarch with Napoleon. The Russian Revolution replaced a monarch with dictatorship. So did the Spanish Civil War. So did the end of monarchy in Germany, China, Japan and a host of other nations.

Many republics today retain monarchies which have little or no political power but are venerated by the people as symbols of power. They also provide cultural identity and continuity with the past--a mythology of national (ie tribal) identity.

Representative governments are almost universally hated because compromise is messy and, well, compromising. Almost every congress, assembly and parliament suffers low approval ratings while their executives--presidents and prime ministers--enjoy much higher approval ratings because as leaders they are symbols for their nation.

There is great temptation around the world to return to dictatorship, to monarchy. This is an instinctual drive in our species. Representative government on large scale is new to us. As a species we're still getting the hang of it.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,945
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
But now we don’t have journalism. We have programs of three or four commentators from different sides (talking heads, spokesmen, surrogates, or ‘experts’) with a media interlocutor whose job it is to encourage a logomachy (sustained conflict) between members of the panel. It’s just a game of ping pong. I turn these programs off.

Or we have Bill Maher, Hannity, Carlson, and for a real laugh, ‘’Judge’ Jeanine and Chelsea Handler..

And then we have a president who is an inveterate, habitual and shameless liar.

Gone are the days of a presentation of facts synthesized into a report.

It gets harder and harder for me to find facts unfiltered through bias, opinion and shameless lies.

The journalism is still very much here. It is not on cable networks most of the time. Most, if not all stories on cable, from the left or right, originate from good old print media. The NY Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal still set the table, still do the leg work and check the sources. That has not changed. I agree the talking heads are mostly toxic, and at times the point gets lost. That's not where we have to go to get the news. Again though, it gets back to my point about the failure of education to teach kids how to sort out news and make informed decisions. That is why we have Trump, but he is the symptom of a failed system too long in decline. It takes slightly more effort to read good journalism on line, but it is the best investment anyone ever makes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TexanStar

Chrysippus

Superior Member
Joined
May 30, 2015
Posts
4,566
Media
0
Likes
3,826
Points
148
Location
Oregon (United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The journalism is still very much here. It is not on cable networks most of the time. Most, if not all stories on cable, from the left or right, originate from good old print media. The NY Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal still set the table, still do the leg work and check the sources. That has not changed. I agree the talking heads are mostly toxic, and at times the point gets lost. That's not where we have to go to get the news. Again though, it gets back to my point about the failure of education to teach kids how to sort out news and make informed decisions. That is why we have Trump, but he is the symptom of a failed system too long in decline. It takes slightly more effort to read good journalism on line, but it is the best investment anyone ever makes.

I think that WaPo, NYT, WSJ too often have questionable reporting and opinion biases. My wife and I found that kids suffer from ‘Believe what you see/read’, so we took the time to discuss content critically and assess for logic, completeness and sourcing. It was exhausting until they picked up the methods.
I taught them deductive logic at home before they went off to college. A friend who taught in the math department had a private tutorial in mathematical symbolic logic and how to represent propositions in argument into symbolic notation to make processing easier and more sound, when possible. We had our sons in good schools, but it was not enough. The oldest is a liberal, the twins are conservatives.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,945
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I think that WaPo, NYT, WSJ too often have questionable reporting and opinion biases. My wife and I found that kids suffer from ‘Believe what you see/read’, so we took the time to discuss content critically and assess for logic, completeness and sourcing. It was exhausting until they picked up the methods.
I taught them deductive logic at home before they went off to college. A friend who taught in the math department had a private tutorial in mathematical symbolic logic and how to represent propositions in argument into symbolic notation to make processing easier and more sound, when possible. We had our sons in good schools, but it was not enough. The oldest is a liberal, the twins are conservatives.

There is a difference between an opinion piece and a news story. I can't say I've seen that affect either the Post or the Times.
 

Thikn2velvet1

Loved Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
748
Points
148
But now we don’t have journalism. We have programs of three or four commentators from different sides (talking heads, spokesmen, surrogates, or ‘experts’) with a media interlocutor whose job it is to encourage a logomachy (sustained conflict) between members of the panel. It’s just a game of ping pong. I turn these programs off.

Or we have Bill Maher, Hannity, Carlson, and for a real laugh, ‘’Judge’ Jeanine and Chelsea Handler..

And then we have a president who is an inveterate, habitual and shameless liar.

Gone are the days of a presentation of facts synthesized into a report.

It gets harder and harder for me to find facts unfiltered through bias, opinion and shameless lies.

Conservative Foxnews has a 2.4 million viewership. Progressive CNN and MSNBC have 2.6 million viewership. Seems very balanced as numbers go.
 

Chrysippus

Superior Member
Joined
May 30, 2015
Posts
4,566
Media
0
Likes
3,826
Points
148
Location
Oregon (United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Conservative Foxnews has a 2.4 million viewership. Progressive CNN and MSNBC have 2.6 million viewership. Seems very balanced as numbers go.

The number of viewers has nothing to do with media’s presentation of facts and unbiased reporting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: keenobserver

wallyj84

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Posts
7,023
Media
0
Likes
3,957
Points
333
Location
United States
I think the basic problem is that our IQ is greater than our EQ. Human beings can create amazing technology and large, complex societies but we lack the emotional intelligence to really live in these societies or even construct them in such a way that isn't self destructive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fuzzy_

Thikn2velvet1

Loved Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
748
Points
148
The number of viewers has nothing to do with media’s presentation of facts and unbiased reporting.

In the Kavanaugh confirmation story Foxnews was by a longshot the most balanced media news source of the major networks. I did not say it was balanced overall, just more balanced than any of the progressive outlets, which were wildly partisan. Foxnews reaches 2.4 million viewers, which is about .7% of Americans.
 

Thikn2velvet1

Loved Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
748
Points
148
I think the basic problem is that our IQ is greater than our EQ. Human beings can create amazing technology and large, complex societies but we lack the emotional intelligence to really live in these societies or even construct them in such a way that isn't self destructive.

Can you point out places where we are self destructing or is that just wild unsubstantiated hyperbole?

Crime is down, way down. Healthcare is dramatically better than 20 years ago. Generally day to day living is far far easier than say 40 years ago.