The Scourge of Emotions in our Ideological Wars
Recently, a friend of mine asked me how I felt about our descent into the hell of our ideological warfare. What animated her interest was the kinds of emotions generated by our acidic political environment. What passes for political debate has degenerated into hateful accusations. Hatred causes people on one side of a political struggle to ostracize those who disagree with them. Many families have been riven by hatred and revulsion. The friend I mention herself has family members who will barely speak with her because of political differences. We are cursed by a scourge of emotions.
Yet, If we will not even talk with each other, how can we resolve that which divides us? A further descent into an abyss of hatred and fear seems inevitable.
An Instability Driven by Emotions Forces Increasing Polarization
Our emotions provide the fuel for a positive feedback mechanism that constantly increases the many polarizations dividing us. I suspect this is no news to most, as just about everyone can see emotions driving us apart in our own lives and in the lives of others.
The emotions most responsible for dividing us are the reinforcing duo of fear and hatred.
The emotions most responsible for dividing us are the reinforcing duo of fear and hatred. At least these are the most evident feelings observed in our political conversations. One can easily imagine other passions, such as greed and love, dividing us. Nevertheless, in the current political environment, fear and hatred seem to dominate. They are the primary emotions driving the so-called “cancel culture.”
In the Pew Research Center post I linked to the phrase “cancel culture,” the varying views on cancel culture are described as follows. Some Americans (mainly progressives and Democrats) regard cancel culture as calling for accountability for people for their views, speech, and actions. Other Americans (mainly libertarians, neoliberals — aka “conservatives” — and Republicans) see cancel culture as censorship and punishment for not agreeing with progressive ideas and views.
One way of understanding cancel culture incorporates both the progressive and “conservative” conceptions. Cancel culture is what progressives practice when so-called “conservatives” display fundamental disagreements with progressive ideas. Progressives passionately believe the American Right must be held accountable for their disagreements. In their view, such disagreements must be censored and punished. The back and forth reactions to cancel culture actions and responses to them create the feedback mechanism that is tearing us apart.
The way the feedback mechanism increases political polarization can be easily described. Each of the major ideological sides (progressives and so-called “conservatives”) has basic beliefs on the social role of government that are fundamentally antagonistic to each other. Progressives would like to drastically increase the role of government in solving social and economic problems. “Conservatives” believe that when government attempts to solve problems, it generally makes the problems worse. More often than not, considerably worse.
Both sides ascribe the worst motives to their opponents as the cause of their opposition. The Left attributes racism, greed, and ignorance as responsible for the hostility of the Right toward progressive ideas. Those on the Right, on the other hand, see a lust for power, intellectual arrogance, and willful stupidity as the root causes of Leftist demands for more government control over society. Each side despises and fears the other. The fear then generates mutual hatred. The fear and hatred then drives us further apart, which increases the fear and hatred, etc., etc., etc.
Just how effective the emotion-driven feedback mechanism has been can be seen in a recent University of Virginia, Center for Politics poll. Among the poll’s questions was the following: “The situation in America is such that I would favor [Blue/Red] states seceding from the union to form their own separate country.” Approximately 52 percent of Trump voters and 41 percent of Biden voters said they agreed with this proposition.
The Problem with Emotions Guiding Our Decisions
The almost unassailable problem our emotions cause lies precisely in the fact they fuel a positive feedback mechanism. There seems little possibility to break the feedback loop and end it. In addition, the emotions themselves do not point the way to solutions for problems. Indeed if one reacts primarily emotionally to a severe social or economic problem, one might respond in a way that is consistent with personal prejudices, but not necessarily actually compatible with social reality. If solutions are not immediately within individuals’ capabilities, the temptation is to look to government for answers.
Absolutely no one is immune to the emotional feedback loop. When I am told that because of my white skin I am necessarily a racist according to Critical Race Theory, I am enraged. (Progressives promoting Critical Race Theory, call this reaction of mine white fragility, I believe.) I am even more incensed as a neoliberal Republican over the stupid progressive lie that people like me are evil fascists. In point of fact, fascism is a form of socialism. There was not a dime’s worth of difference between the fascism of Adolf Hitler and Stalin’s communism. Both governments had almost total control over their country’s economy. So which political party has striven for greater government control over the U.S. economy? My emotional response to this question is that if progressives want to see fascists, they should look into a mirror.
When I work myself up emotionally in this way, I have to remind myself I need to control my feelings. If I, like many others, allow myself to indulge them, I am only contributing to the hatred that drives the feedback loop making our ideological polarization even greater.
It is not that our emotions have no role in our discussions.
It is not that our emotions have no role in our discussions. Necessarily, emotions must point us toward our most fundamental desires. They must tell us what our most cherished goals are. However, our emotions have nothing to tell us on how to accomplish those goals.
To find the means to achieve our goals, most will recognize they themselves do not have the means or power. The temptation is then to look to the government. As a collective entity, it can gather the assets and strength of everyone. Surely this would be enough to create a utopian society? This is the reasoning of progressives, and more generally of dirigistes worldwide. When neoliberals on the Right resist dirigistes’ desires to use government to create a utopia, people on the Left are understandably angered to be so stymied. This anger then generates more Leftist hatred of the Right. If only progressives could “cancel” those hateful Republicans, the government could create a heaven on Earth.
Yet, this kind of reasoning is a trap. Government lacks the competence and the capability to solve or even ameliorate most social and economic problems. Empirical evidence supporting this assertion can be found in the following essays.
The reasons why a free-market capitalist economy serves society much better than one that is government-controlled can be found in the following essays.
Although these essays emphasize a country’s economy, the reasoning is easily extended to other large systems of interacting human beings. First, all such systems are necessarily chaotic and have similar descriptions. Second, the solution of almost all social problems depends on a healthy economy distributing its fruits as widely as possible. These facts are discussed in the post A New Paradigm for Democratic Government Coming?.
The only way we can break out of our emotional feedback loop is to (1) tolerate each other’s incompatible beliefs, and (2) use reason coupled with empirical evidence to discover how we can solve problems. How we can do all this in the face of growing hatred and fear is beyond me.
Views: 2,556