As discussed elsewhere in this blog, it's only human nature to harbor personal cognitive biases; and thinking in term of an overly simplistic "us vs. them" dichotomy where one side is favored over the other.
One recent very notable example was liberals' kind of blase attitude towards President Obama, who continued George W. Bush's military policies, torture and privacy issues despite the initial hope that he would put an end to those and focus on economic recovery. This example loudly and clearly demonstrates just how powerful cognitive bias can be.
Also discussed elsewhere in this blog: the brain has a tendency to condense information (like a jpeg) in order to process it quickly and economically. Mental jpegs are roughly defined as a subset of ideas, assumptions, traits or characteristics. Conversely, a partial or incomplete set of ideas or characteristics can elicit a mental jpeg label with the assumption that all other ideas, characteristics, etc. are associated with them.
Advertisers routinely utilize this power of association through branding. For example, Nike engineered its reputation to be associated with professional sports. Now, Nike can simply drop its logo onto a variety of products to make the consumer feel as if they're associated with celebrity athletes. Notice that some of the most famous brands utilize a simple logo to invoke a particular identity or emotion. The brand logos are a form of mental jpeg.
Politicians and pundits have similarly followed these marketing strategies. Basically, they take advantage of the falsely dichotomous, "us vs. them" kind of thinking by first establishing a divisive narrative based on a tribe or "team" analogy. For example, one is EITHER "conservative" OR "liberal"; the narrator "branding" themselves as being associated with certain virtues, while demonizing their opponents.
Issues that may be associated with one faction of these "teams" may end up being associated with the entire "brand" in either a positive or negative way. This is why Republicans like wrapping the flag around themselves and loudly associate themselves with Christianity. They're basically "branding" themselves with symbols and imagery.
A representation of this oversimplified "liberal vs. conservative" false dichotomy might look something like this:
I call this "lumpy thinking". Not only does it imply "lumping" ideas and notions together, but it evokes the sort of intellectual laziness associated with making these kinds of broad assumptions. And the lazier the thinking, the more rudimentary and more caricatured their notions become.
But the fact is, each of the above topics are not necessarily mutually inclusive. As we can see, all of these concepts can and should be addressed independently of the other, as ideas or issues.
Lumpy thinking by association can also involve a muddling or confuscation of facts. Among countless examples: associating the Iraq War as having something to do with the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is one famous example. ...Or assuming a statement such as "open our borders to information on sustainable technologies" had anything to do with literal geographic borders or immigration. ...Or racist attacks on Asians because the coronavirus initially became a pandemic in Wuhan, China.
Before the expiration of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, it was required on news and radio programs to present both sides of an issue. The pros and cons of each issue were discussed in detail. The dividing of American political factions and presenting them like a sporting match arose in the subsequent years.
Now, instead of focusing on the various issues and exploring the "pros" and "cons" in a problem-solving manner, you have media outlets focusing on who the "good guys" and "bad guys" are in the political arena.
To be certain, there are going to be conflicts in a big country with such a diverse population. But problems will never be solved if its leaders insist on dividing its people instead of focusing on trying to approach issues in a more analytical and constructive manner.
So if your thinking is currently dominated by who is a "liberal" or "conservative", and you tend to react a certain way to those individuals (or certain issues) then congratulations -- you’ve just fallen for one of the oldest, most rudimentary ploys in the book: “us vs. them”. As soon as you start viewing your fellow Americans in terms of one group against another, you’ve lost. WE’VE lost. You're playing along with a with a narrative concocted by the pundits you watch or listen to.
And that might make for good ratings points for them -- especially during a time when there aren't any real wars or foreign "bad guys" making headlines right now. So the collective American conscious - primed by years of hawkish narratives - is now in the throes of a cultural auto-immune disorder. When we have nothing else to attack, we turn on ourselves.
https://govtrackinsider.com/restore-the-fairness-doctrine-act-would-require-broadcasters-give-airtime-to-all-sides-of-an-issue-1f3117e20d03
[This essay was originally posted to the "Evolution Debate" section and modified in order to encompass a more general scope].