Category Archives: Politics

Talking Right

I just finished listening to Fresh Air on NPR. Terry Gross had an interview with Geoffrey Nunberg whose book, Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times-Reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show just came out. As you know, I am interested in the way the Right has appropriated English language in the US so I listened carefully. You can also hear the podcast (a little later today, I assume) and read a little excerpt from the book on the link above.
While most of what he said is pretty much the same as his University-mate Lakoff says (and interestingly, I did not catch them mentioning Lakoff during the show), I was surprised when he stated that everything comes out of language. Everything else he says implies the opposite – its starts with the human mind, and is converted to language by political wordsmiths like Frank Luntz. Thus, language becomes the element in the feedback loop that reinforces what the mind already thinks, but it is not the starting point of that loop.
Anyway, I have placed the book on my wish list as I cannot afford it right now and I’d like to hear any comments from readers who get to read the book before I do.

Nationalism and Patriotism

OK, today I’d like you to superimpose a couple of very different articles that all look at the difference between patriotism and nationalism, but each from a different angle and see if, and how, they inform each other. First, I’d like you to read one of my old posts (which I may decide to re-post here one day, but for now, check it out on my old blog) – Nationalism is not Patriotism. That would be a bare-bone introduction to political psychology of patriotism and nationalism:

Why is there a widespread belief that the difference between patriotism and nationalism is one of degree: loving one’s country versus loving it even more? I think that the difference is not quantitative but qualitative – the phrase “love for one’s country” used by the two kinds of people (patriots and nationalists) is based on very different meanings of the words “love”, “for”, “one” and “country”.

Now, let’s move from bare bones to the results of some real research on the topic, ably dissected and distilled by Chris in Two Types of Patriotism:

To these people, the political landscape in the U.S. is composed of two villages, one populated by patriots, and the other by America haters. There doesn’t seem to be any room in between, and a patriot seems to be defined as adopting a less than critical attitude towards one’s country. For me, this raises interesting questions about what patriotism is, and as a psychologist, questions about the psychological makeup of a patriot. Since today’s the 4th of July, it seems like a good time to talk about a little of what I’ve learned.

Small Grey Matters responds to Chris’ post with one of his own – What are authoritarians like?:

One of the many interesting findings to come out of the behavioral genetics literature is that the heredity of political orientation (defined in terms of variables such as conservatism vs. liberalism, right-wing authoritarianism, etc.) is about as high as that of general intelligence and most major personality dimensions-typically around 50-65%. That’s to say, over half of the variance in questionnaires including items such as “Our country needs a powerful leader to overthrow the radical and immoral values that are present in today’s society” is attributable to genetic influences (most of the remainder is due to unique, or non-shared, environmental influences).

I think that the idea that psychological traits related to political orientation are heritable is true, but NOT VIA GENES! It is inherited via a developmental process. Conservatives raise their children in such a way that their emotional development results in them becoming conservatives when they grow up, thus perpetuating the trait across generations – that is the definition of inheritance. And it is not teaching conservatism directly – it is providing an environment in which a child will develop conservative traits.
Furthermore, ideologically like-minded people tend to live in the same place – thus the broader community (village, church, school, local media, etc.), not just parents, adds to the developmentally important aspects of the social environment. In a sense, it is niche-construction – a trait results in the modification of the environment in a way that favors the perpetuation of that same trait. Move to a different environment (e.g., college town, Europe), and different traits develop which build a different environment which favors that new (liberal) trait. No DNA is involved here at all. I have touched on this many times before on my blog (see, for instance this post).
Finally, once you have absorbed lessons from Chris’ post, apply his analysis to the symbolism in some ‘patriotic’ songs, provided to you by Josh in What isn’t clear about ‘This Land is Your Land’?:

My (least) favorite line: “I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free.” “At least”? Really? We could basically boil the song down to “America: sufficiently better than Russia.” This isn’t patriotism, it’s blind nationalism. And the difference is instructive. Why exactly Lee Greenwood wants God to bless America is really left to the imagination of the reader, and it’s not clear that Greenwood has a good idea beyond that it’s where he happens to live.

Now you have academic and instinctual all tied together and you really grok the difference between nationalism and patriotism, don’t you?

Why Is Academia Liberal?

Why Is Academia Liberal?When I posted this originally (here and here) I quoted a much longer excerpt from the cited Chronicle article than what is deemed appropriate, so this time I urge you to actually go and read it first and then come back to read my response.

Continue reading

It’s Conservatism, Stupid!

Again, an article echoing Lakoff’s argument, with which I agree:
Why Conservatives Can’t Govern:

If leaders consistently depart in disastrous ways from their underlying political ideology, there comes a point where one has to stop just blaming the leaders and start questioning the ideology.
The collapse of the Bush presidency, in other words, is not just due to Bush’s incompetence (although his administration has been incompetent beyond belief). Nor is it a response to the president’s principled lack of intellectual curiosity and pitbull refusal to admit mistakes (although those character flaws are certainly real enough). And the orgy of bribery and special-interest dispensation in Congress is not the result of Tom DeLay’s ruthlessness, as impressive a bully as he was. This conservative presidency and Congress imploded, not despite their conservatism, but because of it.

The Political Brain

The Political Brain
This post was initially published on September 16, 2004. It takes a critical look at some UCLA studies on brain responses of partisan voters exposed to images of Bush and Kerry:

Continue reading

All Politics Is Local

This week, it took me quite a while to figure out how to answer the Ask a ScienceBlogger question: “What are some unsung successes that have occurred as a result of using science to guide policy?”
As a relative newcomer to the United States, and even more a newcomer to American politics, I was not around long enough to pay attention to various science-driven policies of the past. Most of what I know are far from “unsung” successes – from Manhattan Project, through Clean Air and Clean Water acts, to the EWndangered Species Act, to the international Kyoto Protocol. Dealing with DDT, DES, thalidomide is also well-known. The space program is quite well sung! Various policies in other countries are also well known at least to the local population.
So, I thought, I should probably take a look at some issues that, informed by science, became policy at the state or local level. Then, my wife reminded me about the topic I know something about, as I have written about it several times before, e.g., here, here and here.
That’s right. Forward-looking school systems in reality-based communities around the country have, over the last several years, implemented a policy that is based on science – sending elementary school kids to school first in the morning, middle-schoolers next, and high-schooler last. This is based on the effects of puberty on the performance of the human circadian clock. For teenagers, 6am is practically midnight – their bodies have barely begun to sleep. Although there have been some irrational (or on-the-surface-economics-based) voices of opposition – based on conservative notions of laziness – they were not reasonable enough, especially not in comparison to the scientific and medical information at hand, for school boards to reject these changes.
So, click on the links above for my long-winded rants on the topic, both the science part and the policy part. I am very happy that my kids are going to school in such an enlightened environment, and I am also happy to note that every year more school systems adopt the reasonable starting schedules based on current scientific knowledge.

The ecology of the Church

I hope you have heard the Diane Rehm Show on NPR this morning at 10EDT (the first hour of the show). The guest was the presiding Episcopal Bishop-Elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, the first woman to lead the Episcopal Church. She is an amazing woman. You should listen to the show here (Real Audio) or here (Windows Media) (the best parts are starting at about 8th minute). I especially liked the way her training in oceanography influences the way she looks at the world and the way her church should be organized.
For instance, she is aware that greater species diversity makes an ecosystem more robust and more resistant to disruption. Thus, she is afraid of a religiously unifrm society – she used the metaphor of a monoculture, where having a large plot of land covered in just one crop requires a huge investment in fertilizers, insecticides and work – all unneccessary in a diverse environment.
Another interesting example she used was one about the humpbacks whales. Apparently, individual whales from all around the world leave their groups and travel to a spot close to Hawaii a couple of times a year. There, they sing their songs and, as they listen to each other they modify their songs. They learn songs from each other. In the end, they all together make a single song which is a combination of the individual original songs they brought to the meeting. Then, each whale swims home and teaches neighbors the new song. There, in each locality, the song changes over time as diffeernt individuals make changes to it. Then, the whales go to a Hawaian meeting again with their new songs and make a new song again. She sees this as a model for how the church should operate – bringing the voices of the people to a bishops’ meeting, where they write policy, which affects people who respond to it, and so on and one, constantly being modified through this interchange between the clergy and their flocks.

Assault on (Higher) Education – a Lakoffian Perspective

Assault on (Higher) Education - a Lakoffian PerspectiveThis post was first written on October 28, 2004 on Science And Politics, then it was republished on December 05, 2005 on The Magic School Bus. The Village vs. The University – all in your mind.

Continue reading

Obligatory Readings of the Day – Publius is on the roll

WHY DAVID BRODER AND MARSHALL WITTMAN THREATEN DEMOCRACY:

If you look out over the landscape and think that both sides are equally bad and that the answer is somewhere in the middle, then you aren’t looking very closely. In fact, you’re not looking at all. You’re letting a pre-existing concept (the vanity of your own conspicuous centrism and bipartisan goodness) warp your perceptions of reality.

AND ALL THE PUNDITS ARE INSANE :

The fact that the GOP isn’t getting chased out of town and harassed endlessly by adopting this policy shows just how skewed everyone’s center of gravity is. There really needs to be a seismic shift in how these things are perceived.

There need not be anything wrong with Kansas…

…if we all pitch in an help the challengers to get elected to the Kansas School Board – those people who are trying to replace the Creationists and get science education in the state back on track. How can you help? Josh Rosenau of Thoughts From Kansas has all the information put together so you can get the information and, if you can, help.

Creationism Is Just One Symptom Of Conservative Pathology

Creationism Is Just One Symptom Of Conservative Pathology
This is one a couple of posts about Creationism, written originally on May 1st, 2005.

Continue reading

Human rights for Apes?

Spanish Parliament Supports Rights for Apes
Spanish MPs push for apes’ rights
What do you think?

Comissar in the Seventh House

There is a whole slew of responses to this silly post by Comissar/
It is a typical effort to make “balance” between Left and Right in order to make the Right appear more palatable, …or palatable at all. The typical He-said-She-said approach that tries to equalize the enormously dangerous policies of the Right (see my previous post below) with follies of some powerless, silly people on the fringes that nominally belong to the Left (and vote Nader when it really matters!).
But, since when was Astrology part of the Democratic Party platform, even at state level, like Creationism and Global Warming Denial are in the GOP? Which party did Nancy Reagan belong to? And who the hell is Jerome Armstrong and why should I care? Is he just another Ward Churchill, a nobody that the vicious Right can beat up on blogs every day?
So, read the responses (and excellent comments) by:
PZ Myers, Ed Brayton, DarkSyde, Brent Rassmussen and Alon Levy.
It is funny that Comissar lists people who are so different from each other politically, some closer to Comissar himself than to the DNC. It is also funny that Comissar lists people who have, originally, when it was still fun before more dangerous and pressing things happened to the world in November 2000, written against astrology and other pseudoscience. It is also funny that he lists people who have invented the Skeptic’s Circle and Carnival of the Godless where such stuff is debunked (and the founder of Tangled Bank in which such stuff was debunked before the founding of the Skeptic’s Circle).
And I have chimed in on this topic before in Lefty and Righty excesses of pseudo-science.

Obligatory Reading of the Day

Bush Is Not Incompetent by George Lakoff:

Progressives have fallen into a trap. Emboldened by President Bush’s plummeting approval ratings, progressives increasingly point to Bush’s “failures” and label him and his administration as incompetent. Self-satisfying as this criticism may be, it misses the bigger point. Bush’s disasters — Katrina, the Iraq War, the budget deficit — are not so much a testament to his incompetence or a failure of execution. Rather, they are the natural, even inevitable result of his conservative governing philosophy. It is conservatism itself, carried out according to plan, that is at fault.

The article is long and elaborate, but the core idea is exactly what I wrote back in September 2005: Stop Beating on Bush!

Moral Order

ClockWeb%20logo2.JPG This was an early post of mine building upon George Lakoff analysis of the psychology underlying political ideology. It was first published on September 04, 2004 (mildly edited):

Continue reading

Carnival of the Liberals #15

Carnival of the Liberals is up on Varkam’s portion of the group-blog Neural Gourmet. This is a competitive carnival where the host picks the Ten Best Posts of the week, out of several dozens entries. I am very happy to see that Top Ten this week include four posts from science blogs, and of those, two are from scienceblogs.com.

She rips him a new ozone hole!

For a particularly juicy manner of dealing with a global warming denier (and general wackjob) Dennis Prager, read Amanda’s delicious rant: Gasbag expands as global temperatures rise.

Carnival of the Green

The 32nd edition of the Carnival of the Green is now up on Savvy Vegetarian.

The Future of Terrorism

The July issue of Discover Magazine has an excellent article on The Future of Terrorism. You should readthe whole thing, online or in hardcopy. Here are some choice quotes by people interviewed for the article:

“The war on terrorism is really a proxy for saying what is really a war on militant Islam. If we can’t confront the ideology, if you’re not willing to take on the ideology and try to develop a reformist, moderate Islam that makes militant Islam a fringe element, we haven’t much hope to stamp it out.”

Andrew C. McCarthy, former federal prosecutor who led the case against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman.

“A nuclear terrorism attack is inevitable if we continue on the autopilot path we’re on.” The odds of a nuclear attack on U.S. soil in the next five years are “51-49.”

Graham Allison, assistant secretary of defense in the first Clinton administration and now director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University

“I’m less worried about terrorists becoming biologists than biologists becoming terrorists”

Gerald Epstein, senior fellow at the Homeland Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

“It’s easy to go around whipping up hysteria. I’m not a terrorism expert, but they seem to favor things that blow up and make loud noises rather than subtle increases in deaths from infectious agents.”

Biologist Craig Venter, who is skeptical of the bioterrorism threat.

“The current leadership of the terrorist organizations are of a generation that doesn’t trust cyber means of attack. Once we see a new generation of leadership that is more comfortable with technology, we’re going to see more of this.”

Mike Skroch, Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

“You can never get a fingerprint online, but you can get a writeprint.” If there is a new message, I can tell you if it’s from Bin Laden or his lieutenant.”

Hsinchun Chen, designer of the Dark Web Project

“Do I think we’ll ever stop it? Could we get it to a manageable level? I think we can do that.”

Howard Safir, former New York City police commissioner

“We know from the basis of past periods of terrorism that they don’t last forever. This is a phenomenon, as troubling as it is, that will turn out to have a beginning, middle, and end.”

Michael Barkun, political scientist at the Maxwell School in Syracuse, New York

The most advanced technology that terrorists have at their disposal is television. “Essentially, it’s an image war. PR is everything in terrorism. Why? Look at what the terrorists are trying to achieve: political or ideological change. And if people don’t buy into a doctrine, the terrorists can’t succeed.”

Graham Dillon, heads the financial-crime advisory service of the London branch of the accounting firm KPMG

“There would be such enormous pressure for an immediate and devastating political response. Three Algerians from Paris blow up a bomb in Washington; we vaporize Tehran and get rid of everybody we don’t like: anyone who’s strategically culpable, whom we believe either supports terrorism [or] sponsors it directly or indirectly. If that happens, the world would be as different a place as after World War II.”

Scott Atran, an anthropologist at the University of Michigan and at the National Center for Scientific Research in Paris

“You can do preventative things. And you can make people safer. You can’t make people safe. You are never safe, because in an open and free society you’re always vulnerable to people who are extreme.”

Howard Safir

“…they’re just itching to get out!”

Back To The Woom is a blog that needs to get much more exposure. It is written by a very smart couple here in Raleigh, NC. The posts are always very thoughtfull and well-researched and the topics range from Ann Raynd to immigration, from capital punishment to harsh capitalism. Always worth your time to read (even if you disagree on a detail or two).
This time, I’d like to point your attention to the latest post – The moral majority is watching your inner child molester:

The implication is that, without the threat of eventual punishment at the hands of an omniscient cosmic dictator, many of us would just abandon all the ethical, social and juridical obligations that had hitherto constrained our behavior. Yep, God is all that keeps you from combusting into a terrible, murderous fury!

It describes what psychologists call the External Locus of Moral Authority. Go and check it out.

Obligatory Reading of the Day

WHERE’S YOUR FLAG?

Carnival of the Liberals – call for submissions

Message from the proprietors of the Carnival of the Liberals:

Dear Liberal Carnivalers,
Did you think we’d disappeared? Don’t worry (or celebrate), you’re not getting rid of us that easily!
Some logistical issues caused a bit of a delay and resulted in The Uncredible Hallq swapping hosting slots with Varkam at Neural Gourmet. Varkam will be hosting Carnival of the Liberals #15 on Wednesday, June 21st and and the deadline is Tuesday, June 20th by 7PM EDT. So, what are you waiting for? Get to sending in those submissions!
Note: Anyone who sent in something prior to this message, there’s no need to resend it. Varkam has a copy of everybody’s submissions thus far.
BTW: We’ve still got hosting slots in August (16th and 30th), so if anyone’s interested, shoot me an e-mail. We’ve had a lot of new people participating in CotL in recent weeks, so why not give a thought to hosting? We’d love to see some new faces taking a turn at their own editions.
See everyone Wednesday at Neural Gourmet!

Counter-Coulter action

Greensmile of The Executioners Thong blog has a question. He (sorry for gender confusion – edited) is offering to set up an automated webpage which people can use to send letters to the advertisers and sponsors of TV shows that allow right-wing talking points (e.g., having Coulter a as a guest) to be aired unchallenged. Woudl you be interested? If so (or if not and have a good reason to explain why not), go over there and chime in in the comments.
What kind of people on what kind of shows? Here is a short sampler.

Book Review: George Lakoff “Moral Politics” and E.J.Graff “What Is Marriage For?”

ClockWeb%20logo2.JPG
This was first posted on http://www.jregrassroots.org/ forums on July 10, 2004, then republished on Science And Politics on August 18, 2004. That was to be just the first, and most raw, post on this topic on my blog. It was followed by about a 100 more posts building on this idea, modifying it, and changing my mind in the process. You can see some of the better follow-ups here. Also, I have since then read Marriage, a History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage by Stephanie Coontz, which is a much better and more scholarly work than E.J.Graff’s book. Below the fold is the article with mild edits (e.g., omitting the pre-election hurrays!):

Continue reading

Inconvenient Truth

Al Gore’s movie is opening locally tomorrow (though not in the theater up the street) and I am really looking forward to seeing it. I have just read what is, in my opinion, the best review of the movie: Brokeback Earth by Godfrey Cheshire. It is long but well worth your time.
The first page or so is actually about the movie, about the science behind the movie and about Al Gore himself. The latter part, where it starts delving into politics is perhaps the best. Here is just a tiny little excerpt to whet your appetites:

………snip…………
By my not entirely scientific calculations, it was circa the onset of the Reagan administration that many Americans traded a rudimentary engagement with unmediated reality for an addiction to feel-good fantasy as contrived and delivered by an increasingly sophisticated alliance of large corporate and right-wing political interests. The result is something that undermines the single most critical component in a democracy: Many people don’t vote on the basis of self-interest because they can’t identify it. Reality itself has grown malleable. This may be a “soft” Orwellianism, but it’s Orwellian nonetheless. Up is down. In is out. Lies are truth. John Kerry is a Vietnam War shirker, George W. Bush a hero of the same fight.
………snip…………
Likewise, the huge corporate interests that generate our culture’s politicized fantasy have done a remarkably good job in convincing at least half the country that, according to many “experts,” global warming is “unproven” or “controversial.” What chance does a little indie film have against this pervasive climate of disinformation? To put it purely in movie terms, though An Inconvenient Truth’s early earnings were impressive, they were dwarfed by those of The Omen, which tells us that recent natural disasters are due to the approach of the End Times.
………snip…………

Now go and read the whole thing…

Bush Falls In Love With Dolphins!

Bush to Create World’s Largest Marine Protected Area Near Hawaii

“…..A turning point came in April, when Bush sat through a 65-minute private White House screening of a PBS documentary that unveiled the beauty of — and perils facing — the archipelago’s aquamarine waters and its nesting seabirds, sea turtles and sleepy-eyed monk seals, all threatened by extinction.
The film seemed to catch Bush’s imagination, according to senior officials and others in attendance. The president popped up from his front-row seat after the screening; congratulated filmmaker Jean-Michel Cousteau, son of the late underwater explorer Jacques Cousteau; and urged the White House staff to get moving on protecting these waters….”

The power of the well-made nature documentary!
(Hat-tip: somewaterytart on Shakespeare’s Sister)