Viewing entries in
Politics and Economics
Patriotism is devotion and loyalty to one’s country. Some say patriotism is the author of all sorts of ills. It easily morphs into its ugly cousin Nationalism, that bully with a superiority complex. By favoring one’s own country over others, patriotism encourages the denigration, hatred or distrust of others, making violations of human rights more acceptable.
There are two ways we dehumanize others: focus on their machine-like qualities or stress their animal nature. Mechanistic dehumanization characterizes people as unemotional, cold, and rule-bound, like robots or automatons. Animalistic dehumanization portrays people as overly emotional, impulsive, and childlike.
Helping people in the short term may lead them to make decisions that harm them in the long run. No, this isn’t some cranky diatribe against the welfare state or an argument for tough love. It’s more a plea for activists and politicians to look beyond the intended impact of do-good laws and to seriously consider trade-offs and potential unintended consequences.
Trump supporters are often portrayed as economically stressed victims of globalization and the decline of US manufacturing, worried about job security and stagnating incomes. But as the last post documented, they do not appear to be plagued by trouble finding work. By and large, Trump Country has low unemployment rates.
Trump supporters have been portrayed as victims of globalization and the decline of US manufacturing, stuck in low-paid jobs offering little in the way of job security or earning potential. Angry and desperate, the story goes, they flocked to that champion of the scorned and neglected, Donald J. Trump, who would kick out the corrupt elites, restore hope, heal pride, and make America great again.
The narrative goes something like this: Trump supporters are a bunch of profoundly unhappy bigots, ill-educated country bumpkins left behind by the forces of globalization, plagued by job insecurity, battered down by inequality, worried sick about their future, consumed by resentment of the liberal elites and racist to the core.
In their analysis of survey responses regarding proposed federal policies, Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page compare the policy preferences of “average citizens” versus “economic elites.
In their paper Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens (2014), Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page analyze survey data on public support for proposed federal policies.
“Good research is cautious about drawing conclusions, careful to identify uncertainties and avoids exaggerated claims. It demands multiple types of evidence to reach a conclusion. It does not assume that association (things occur together) proves causation (one thing causes another). Bad research often contains jumps in logic, spurious arguments, and non-sequiturs (‘it does not follow’).” Todd Litman
All hail the engineer’s approach to problem solving! Recognize a need...Define the problem, the objectives and the constraints...Collect information and data...Generate alternative solutions... Evaluate the consequence of different solutions...
The technocrat is often perceived as uninspired, narrow-minded, overly focused on details, a competent underling. The opposing construct is that of the visionary: charismatic, impassioned, focused on the Big Picture, confident of his vision, a leader.
The Electoral College system mitigates the excesses of majoritarian rule by giving less populated states a bit more influence in election outcomes. The Electoral College system forces candidates and presidents to attempt a transregional appeal because no single region of the country is sufficient to guarantee victory.
We all know who won in 2012. But did you know Obama actually won by the lowest number of counties in modern US history? Just 712 counties out of 3007 voted blue – that’s less than a quarter of all counties in the US.
“To do this may be to be a mere technocrat, rather than a complete human being concerned with the moral implications of what I say and the greatest good of society…” (Solomon M. Fulero and Lawrence S. Wrightsman-2008: Forensic Psychology)
There’s this cool measure called the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status. It was developed to capture self-perceived social status by means of a pictorial9-rung ladder. The Scale asks individuals to place an "X" on the rung on which they feel they stand.
For the sake of argument, I'm reducing the value of social status to its effect on widening the "field of eligibles" - that is, increasing the quality and quantity of potential mates. When in mate-seeking mode, we look around to see who’s available and who we think we can attract. Social comparison is the game. Inequality of mating opportunities is built into this game.
Should every generation be “better off” than the previous generation? What does “better off” mean? Looking only at the middle class and above, I’m assuming recent generations have been able to meet their core needs (sufficient housing, nutrition, healthcare, and education), so what should the current middle class be getting to reflect that they’re doing better than their parents?
I would imagine that many people who commit criminal acts are victims of abusive caregiving, awful environments, or at least genetically-influenced traits that facilitate criminal behavior (e.g., impulsiveness, mental illness, substance abuse, cognitive impairments). As victims, should these offenders get special treatment in the criminal justice system?
In several posts I have supported a modest Basic Income Guarantee (BIG), with the proviso that it be sufficiently miserly not to disincentivize work or add to the federal budget.
Global population growth is not slowing down fast enough.