Skip to main content

I hold my beliefs because I think they are true and correct based on all of the information that I have been exposed to during my life. Why would I hold on to a belief that I know to be false? That would be rather stupid, wouldn't it? Is the earth flat? No. Do unicorns exist? No. Is Santa Claus white? OMG, he's a fictional character!!!

I think other people are pretty much the same as me in this regard. I've never met a person who held a belief that they personally thought was stupid. I might find that person's views to be ignorant or unsophisticated, but they themselves don't actually realize what they don't know, God bless 'em.  

If I want to have a positive influence in changing my friend's belief, my theory is that it is best done by respectfully exposing them to information that will let the air out of the balloon that is a false belief. Easier said than done, though, especially when my friend acts like a self-righteous a-hole.  BTW, I have also noticed that my most brilliant friends tend to be the most humble, ironically: my theory is that those folks have a greater "knowledge" of the vastness of their ignorance in terms of what could potentially be known.

Anyhoo, the reason I'm writing this diary is because I came across a fascinating article today by Rebecca Klein, Researchers Think They Know Why College-Educated People Support The Tea Party

Researchers from the University of Notre Dame said college graduates are more likely to support tea party ideas if they live in counties characterized by high levels of residential segregation based on education level. The researchers found the correlation between tea party support and educational segregation to be uniquely strong compared to factors like racial segregation and class segregation ...

Prior to the study, [researcher Rory McVeigh] posited that the tea party ideology, which advocates for limited government and low government spending, might resonate more among people who don't interact much with low-income individuals who may benefit from government programs. As it turns out, McVeigh was on to something.

“My thinking was that people who are likely to embrace [tea party ideology] are more likely to be people who have had some success and life and limited exposure to those who haven’t enjoyed the same advantages. ... Education is such an important predictor of how you end up in life,” said McVeigh over the phone.

Emphasis mine.  More below the fold.

Translation:  college graduates (who are allegedly "smart people") tend to support the tea party when they more or less live in a special bubble: a community of other highly educated people.  It seems to foster an attitude of "anybody can succeed if they really want to" because of the limited exposure to others who haven't had the same opportunities that they have enjoyed.  What is fascinating to me is that the correlation between tea party support and educational segregation was described as "uniquely strong" compared to other types of segregation, including race and class.  I don't have time right now to probe that further, but my instinct is that educational segregation would tend to walk hand-in-hand with racial and class segregation (in other words, in the reality of today's America, I suspect a community of highly educated persons would also tend to be generally whiter and richer when compared to folks in less educated communities).  

In a press release for the study, McVeigh said “The political polarization that we witness today is linked to the way in which Americans live in segregated worlds.”  When you live in a bubble with other people who think just like you do, there is little opportunity to have faulty beliefs challenged.  Sadly, that seems to be true for those who support the tea party, but I think it is a truth that all of us should strive to keep in mind.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (27+ / 0-)

    If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

    by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:05:59 PM PDT

  •  They're racist an evil like John Roberts SCOTUS (0+ / 0-)

    or the other evil bubble dwellers who think money is more important than people, who don't get discrimination, or sexism.

    F*CK the teapublikkkans. They would be WCC KKK in the 19th/20th cent.

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:11:45 PM PDT

    •  I don't quite know how to respond to that (16+ / 0-)

      Do you know any conservatives that you don't consider racist and evil?

      My parents are right-wing conservative Christians.  I disagree with them so extremely that we generally avoid talking politics and religion (even though I became a Christian before they did).  It is a very painful situation for me

      But I don't think they are racist and evil.  I DO think that they are living in a bubble, the channel always stays on Fox unless I come to visit (then they turn it off out of respect for me).  They think that I am the one living in a bubble, that my opinions are based on either bad facts or a distorted set of facts.  

      I believe that hate begets hate, and love begets love.  Hating those that disagree with me is easy, but once I reach for it, I lose my opportunity to influence.  All that is left is a power struggle, where might makes right.  And I don't believe that might makes right.

      So for me, I have to reject the notion that everyone who supports the Tea Party is racist and evil.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:31:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Very well said (3+ / 0-)

        And I totally agree.

        "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

        by gjohnsit on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:43:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, I don't buy it, baggerism must be DEFEATED. (0+ / 0-)

        The behavior is racist and evil even if the people themselves are not.

        And continuing to engage in racist and evil behavior very shortly makes your actual intentions irrelevant.

        •  The question is, HOW? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SuWho, auapplemac

          I am a liberal, I'd love to turn all red states blue.  I wrote this diary in an attempt to share information that might enable those who are interested to have more influence with conservative friends and family that they might know.

          There's a saying, you catch more flies with honey than you do with sour milk.

          I guarantee that if you a think someone is racist and evil, you are not going to change their mind or their heart.

          On the other hand, if you treat that person respectfully and can manage to expose them to information that they were not previously aware of, you will have made a tiny bit of progress with them.

          If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

          by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 06:01:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  We are getting through to their children (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Older and Wiser Now

            at a fair rate, so that and GOTV mean we ought to be able to tip the country in 2016. We need a few per cent more votes to take the House, which can come from converting young Republicans at a few million a year, or by getting several percent more of our people actually to the polls.

            If we take the opportunity when we gain control of the House to outlaw partisan gerrymanders and voter suppression effectively, and create a new and SCOTUS-proof preclearance list, we will then be able to pass all of the Progressive measures that the public already approves of, and discuss where to go from there without Party of No obstruction.

            I will be writing about how Republican minds work, and what we can do about it, in my new Diary series for the Readers and Book Lovers group, Grokking Republicans. We will start with the scientific evidence for Cognitive Dissonance, the ability to hold unshakably to beliefs contrary to the most obvious evidence, from When Prophecy Fails, by Leon Festinger et al.

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 11:29:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Your new Diary series sounds fascinating (0+ / 0-)

              I will try to look for it when it comes out.  I would love to know more about Cognitive Dissonance, that sounds like a really good place to start.

              Thank you for the heads up!

              If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

              by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 11:35:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Yes! People don't turn evil overnight. (3+ / 0-)

        Let's look at what happened:

        These people are our family, our neighbors, our work mates.  Why would they suddenly espouse such unrealistic views?

        Some people, maybe a majority of Americans,  for decades lived the American Dream:  they got a job, worked, married, raised a family, got better education for their kids.  They were, as far as they knew, on the golden road to a prosperous retirement watching their kids have an even better life.

        Of course, on the way, they are told that there is an enemy that threatens their way of life: liberals, minorities, uppity women.

        But, hey, their life was good, so why worry about the nay-sayers.  They could share their good fortune with others.

        This sufficed until the economy cratered.  How could this happen?  They had been told that America had the best system in the world.

        Suddenly, it became clear that their country had been hijacked just as the conservatives had predicted.

        This is the first step into the bubble.  The second step is, since the country was hijacked, it must have been because the enemy used unfair, maybe even secret, methods because true Americans would never have allowed this to happen.

        Thus a conspiracy theory is born.  The latent racism and xenophobia surface.

        In all times of economic upheaval, extremist groups arise.   The people whose expectations have been smashed don't look to the enemy for answers; they look to those who have praised them.

        Upshot: don't demonize the tpartiers.  They are fearful, angry, disappointed, looking for answers that don't involve them giving up their self-image as true Americans.

      •  It isn't just teapartiers who live in bubbles (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        auapplemac, Older and Wiser Now

        I think the comment you responded to shows that distrust and stereotyping people cuts both ways.  Everyone of us needs to understand we live in bubbles and get out and interact with other people more.  There are over 300 million people in the country with many life experience bubbles that can form.

        My experiences are not the sum-total of reality and I know this.  I run into people from all across the political spectrum who seem to think that theirs is.

        "When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it." - Gerald Celente

        by DrFaustus on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 02:10:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Even College cannot fix . . . (10+ / 0-)

    stupid. Hell look at Ted Cruz he's a Harvard Law grad.

    Frankly, I’m getting more than a little tired of hearing from angry America. I’m also less than fond of knee-jerk America. And when you combine the two with the Internet, you too often get stupid America, which is really annoying.

    by jsfox on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:12:43 PM PDT

  •  I guess I'm not really surprised by this (6+ / 0-)

    The Tea Party isn't about knowing right from wrong it's about shouting loudly enough to get what you want. Remember, many of the Tea Party leaders have college degrees. Some from schools like Harvard. Just because you have an education doesn't mean you have to put it to good use.

    GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

    by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:13:37 PM PDT

    •  I don't think it's about knowing right from wrong (7+ / 0-)

      I think that many folks who support the Tea Party genuinely believe that what they are supporting is "right".  I'm talking about the voters, the guys in the base, not the politicians though.

      Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying, but it's not that they think what they want is "morally wrong", but they are just going to fight for it with gusto anyway in order to win. Folks like my parents genuinely believe that if you work hard in this country, you'll be fine.  They don't understand that they have lived all of their life in a bubble of white privilege (upper middle class, not 1% territory).  And they pretty much always hang out with other folks who are just like them, and so they don't get exposed to evidence that would contradict their opinions.

      Except from me.  But they view me as an anomaly, and get really worked up when I share me views, and basically don't want to talk about certain subjects in order to "keep the peace".

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:51:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The thing that gets me about the Tea Party though (5+ / 0-)

        is the willful ignorance. Take the recent poll where 3 out 4 conservatives still claim Obamacare hasn't helped anyone. This, despite the fact that 10,000,000 have received help from it and the number of uninsured Americans is plummeting. Reality doesn't phase them. And while that reality may not be staring them in the face on a daily basis when the evidence is that overwhelming it's like saying we didn't go to moon simply because you weren't there to see it happen.

        GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

        by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:57:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Guaranteed: 50 percent of them (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ontheleftcoast

          think the moon landings are a conspiracy theory by the government, and filmed in Arizona.

          English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

          by Youffraita on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:16:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And 50 percent think we've got (6+ / 0-)

            a secret moonbase where we're hiding the cure for cancer and immortality drugs. My mother is a Tea Partier. She's 77, on Medicare (breast cancer, heart attack, etc.) all paid for by the government health care and she was complaining about "keeping the government's hand off her Medicare" And she was a school teacher for 20 years. Sigh... Fortunately this apple fell a long, long, lo-o-o-o-o-ong way from that tree.

            GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

            by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:21:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  But you have to keep in mind that (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ontheleftcoast, ybruti, SuWho, auapplemac

          they are living in a bubble.  The are reaching conclusions based on the information that they are being exposed to.  When the channel is on Fox, they don't truly hear the other side.  And so much of what they hear on Fox "makes sense" to them, so they leave it there.

          I just spent a long vacation with my folks, I let them watch Fox when I was there.  I was struck by how the "token liberal" is generally set up in a way to be out-gunned (metaphorically) by the panel of regulars who disagree.  It's human nature to want to side with the majority, I remember learning in college about psychological studies about how group communication can effect an individual's conclusions.

          WRT Obamacare - My family is on it, it's saving me on the order of $15,000 a year.  But that doesn't register with my folks, they think that "most people" are paying more as a result.  They are ignorant in that they don't seem to comprehend that wildly rising insurance prices were one of the reasons that reform was needed, that wildly rising prices existed BEFORE Obamacare; now they assume that ANY rising prices are BECAUSE OF Obamacare.  And they live in a world where all of their friends have health insurance, they don't truly COMPREHEND that many folks didn't have it.  If you don't see the pain, you don't realize it exists.

          You talk about "reality staring them in the face".  The fact is, THEY DON'T SEE IT because they are living in bubble.  They are living in a world where all of the good that has been achieved by Obamacare is not visible to them.

          If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

          by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:18:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, y'know, they COULD learn something (3+ / 0-)

            if they ventured into Reality by watching, oh, let's say, ANYTHING other than Fox.

            They are in a bubble of their own making. I feel no sympathy whatsoever.

            I just hope they don't take the rest of us down into the rabbit hole with them.

            English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

            by Youffraita on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:25:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  But at what point is that choice willful blindness (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Older and Wiser Now, fumie

            and not simply ignorance. That's why I brought up the moon landing. That was witnessed by a couple of billion people when it happened. Average folks watched the rocket go up and folks around the world could use telescopes to see it. Do you the deniers honestly think the Russians wouldn't have screamed loudly that it was faked if they had one shred of evidence it was? So from where I sit anyone that thinks the moon landing is a fake is engaged in willful blindness.

            And, I think ignoring hundreds of reports by choosing to only watch FOX is a form of willful blindness. Forgetting insurance rates going up 5-10% a year (or more!) for decades is a form of willful blindness. They are choosing to be ignorant, or worse, they don't have any excuse.

            GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

            by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:29:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Can't conservatives say the same thing about (4+ / 0-)

              liberals?

              I watch Fox occasionally, but there are several things about it that just get my heart racing.  Such as "discussions" being set up where token liberals I've never heard of are set up against a large number of established Fox regulars.  Such as persons on the left being personally vilified ("Tiller the Baby Killer") rather than having a debate that focuses on the facts of the issue.  The fact that Fox has a habit of AIRING FALSE FOOTAGE apparently deliberately (a Glenn Beck rally was shown instead of an actual Bachmann rally, a photo of Obama was shown instead of Romney during the Republican primaries, James O'Keefe wearing his pimp outfit was shown repeatedly during the "Acorn Scandal", which turned out to be doctored video that Fox never acknowledged or aplogized for).  In other words, I do it occasionally - although I find it very painful - and I mostly do it because I believe that ALL NEWS OUTLETS are biased these days to meet the perceived needs of their target audiences.

              Playing devil's advocate - how much time do you spend absorbing right-wing media vs how much time do you spend absorbing left-wing media?  

              For me, it's probably 5% right-wing and 95% left-wing.

              If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

              by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:58:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I get your point but aside from some totally loopy (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Older and Wiser Now, SuWho

                left sites you will be exposed to debate on left wing sites. And while MSNBC is hardly FOX or FOXLite, err.. CNN, it has hosts like Joe Scarborough. There is nothing as far left as FOX is far right. Nothing. Have you ever seen honest debate on RW sites? It's rare. I remember when the founder of Little Green Footballs decided a few years ago he'd had enough of the mindless adherence to the talking points about climate change. Woo boy was that an implosion. But here the front pagers are openly debated with diaries opposing their views staying on the rec list for days. That's hardly a "bubble". Yes, we (as ericlewis0 says) "lean forward" but we don't exist in a monolithic world view. The left tends to be more "big tent" and welcoming to opposing ideas, it's in our nature to be at least tolerant to differences. The way the right acts these days you'd think differences was some form of deadly neurotoxin to be avoided like death itself.
                 

                GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

                by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:09:59 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  What I hear you saying is that debate on "left (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ontheleftcoast

                  wing" sites is "better" than on right-wing sites.  I prefer what I see on the left-wing sites too.  But I think "better" is a little bit in the eye of the beholder.  

                  When conservatives watch Maddow, apparently a lot of them think she's just a shill.  They hate her. Where does that come from?  I think a big part of it comes from that fact that instead of debating, the right likes to demonize, and Maddow has been demonized big time.  And that affects how she is "seen" when a conservative watches her.   But I think there is also more to it that that.  

                  If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

                  by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 06:16:14 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  MSNBC seldom has a true debate of opposites. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Older and Wiser Now

                    The guests and panels are usually made up of some range of liberal/progressive. Any discussions are usually between moderate liberal, liberal and extreme liberal views.

                    Mathews sometimes has TPers or other RW guests, but they're usually on so that he can attack them for some particular crazy statement they've made.

                    Joe actually has the most diverse list of guests.

                    It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

                    by auapplemac on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 04:21:37 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  As your comment shows, there is bias on the left (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      auapplemac

                      too.

                      However, I feel I must also say that Maddow seems to do her best to treat her guests with respect and to genuinely want to have more folks on the right on her show.  She can ask them, but they must accept the invitation.  Somehow I sense that the lopsided set of guests, as you point out, is significantly affected by right-wing guests making the choice to boycott her show.

                      I don't think that Maddow is the only one to try to treat her guests respectfully, but she is very good / "the best" at it, IMHO.

                      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

                      by Older and Wiser Now on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 10:09:27 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Lean F_u_rward, to be precise eom (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ontheleftcoast

                  Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

                  by Mokurai on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 11:37:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  LOL, I typed furward but the damn spell check (0+ / 0-)

                    corrected it. Better add forward into my dictionary. ;D

                    GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

                    by ontheleftcoast on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 12:14:39 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  There is no such thing as 'left-wing media' .... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Older and Wiser Now, blueoasis

                ... in the United States.

        •  Polling question moreso a response of opposition (0+ / 0-)

          that an expression that they think no one benefited.

          In replies to polling questions, people don't always answer the literal question.

          The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

          by nextstep on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:30:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  How would they know the good news about ACA (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Older and Wiser Now

          when it's never reported by the major news outlets?

          Media kept drumming away at the terrible enrollment start. Since then - crickets; except when something goes a little wrong.

          There is a vast chasm of unreported good news about ACA. Until the public is enveloped with all the good news on a regular basis, there will be no change in their opinion of ACA which is still underwater.

          It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

          by auapplemac on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 04:08:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The point is that they probably controlled (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now, commonmass

    for that: "I don't have time right now to probe that further, but my instinct is that educational segregation would tend to walk hand-in-hand with racial and class segregation". Yeah of course, but I would be highly surprised if they didn't already account for that, and that's why they said that it was particularly salient. That is to say that if you'd expect a group to be Tea Party supports at a 60/40 ratio based on race/class and then it turns out that if you insert education as a variable holding those constant, the numbers change dramatically, then you can isolate the effect of that variable alone.

    •  Yes, I'm sure you are right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      commonmass

      it's just that I'd like to understand more about how exactly they controlled for it. It's a bit counter-intuitive to me.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:16:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think it is the success factor (8+ / 0-)

    I know some successful people in the trades that are not college educated but have a sense that they earned it and do not want their earnings to be taxed so that the "others' who do not work as hard as they do and the "others" who do not want to engage in  physical labor get to enjoy the unearned fruits of the successful person. It is not that they are terribly selfish but they seem to not want to share for the greater good.

    •  I think that's part of it too (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ban nock, auapplemac

      If you honestly believe that poor people are poor because they are lazy and don't want to work, it seems morally wrong to "reward them" for their "poor work ethic" by giving them welfare.

      It's like the story of the grasshopper and the ants.  The ants worked all summer, while the grasshopper goofed off.  The ants were prepared for the winter, but the grasshopper was in desperate straights.

      The right-wing media is constantly looking for stories that re-enforce the myth that poor people are lazy, and that welfare is simply stealing from the "responsible" to give to the "not responsible".  I can see how a steady diet of that crap (and never/rarely being exposed to "good people who want to work" who cannot find jobs, or the working poor who are working 2-3 jobs and still not getting by) would cause one to believe that the poor deserve what they they are getting.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:27:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's "honestly believe" (3+ / 0-)

        and then there's "honestly believe because it's what you want to believe"

      •  We have to get out of our bubble, too. Not all (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Older and Wiser Now

        poor people are saints.

        There are those who prefer to get a handout. There are others who never applied themselves in school or tried to get a GED so they could qualify for a half-way decent job.

        There are those who would rather drink or do drugs than face lives challenges.

        There are those who are brought up in their neighborhood bubble and become "comfortable" with that way of life.

        There are lots of bubbles for all types of mindsets.

        It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

        by auapplemac on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 04:31:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  There are even union members who feel that way. I (0+ / 0-)

      remember when they were being forced to integrate their training programs. Not a pretty picture.

      Let's not forget the Reagan blue collar crowd.

      It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 04:25:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The bubbles that we all live in (9+ / 0-)

    are getting stronger every day. They are reinforced, not only by what our neighbors of similar educational background believe, but also by the networks we watch on television and the websites we visit online.

    •  Very true. And very scary. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Susan from 29, ban nock, SuWho, auapplemac

      We also have social media, where we "friend" folks who tend to agree with how we already think.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:02:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This turns out not to be the case (0+ / 0-)

      as I intend to demonstrate very thoroughly in my new Diary series, Grokking Republicans, which you wrote the intro Diary for.

      The whole point is that Republicans of various kinds work hard at raising their children in their various bubbles, and Democrats work to some degree on exposing their children to the real world, including what Republicans think they think. We could do better at it, but we are nothing like them on this point.

      I am astonished to hear this opinion from you, as a leader in the Readers and Book Lovers group here on dKos.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 11:45:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sadly, one can graduate from college (7+ / 0-)

    without actually gaining much real education.

    " Armageddon could be knocking at my door. But I ain't gonna answer that's for sure." - Kristian Bush, Jennifer Nettles, Kristen Hall

    by rustypatina on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:26:02 PM PDT

    •  LOL! True. (3+ / 0-)

      It was my senior year at Penn State, and the prof mentioned Sigmund Freud. One of the students (also, iirc, a senior) said she never heard of him.

      The prof said she should sue for lack of an education.

      The rest of us just thought she was dumber than dirt.

      English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

      by Youffraita on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:20:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Which brings up the topic, what should (0+ / 0-)

      a real education consist of, and who should teach it?

      Conservatives have long complained that teachers and professors are liberals who brainwash innocent kids.

      They also complain that today's teachers are incompetent because of the evil unions.

      And they are doing their best to "improve" education ... Did you know that the Koch Brothers are dabbling in this area:

      - Koch brothers are buying their way into the minds of public school students with free curriculum

      - Inside the Koch brothers' campus crusade

      When, for example, the Charles Koch Foundation in 2011 pledged $1.5 million to Florida State University’s economics department, a contract between the foundation and university stipulated that a Koch-appointed advisory committee select professors and conduct annual evaluations, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:44:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Like Democracy, Societal Values Are Both + and - (5+ / 0-)

    Remember if you don't see lower income people it's not just the needs you aren't seeing, but you're also not seeing the benefits from social and economic programs.

    There's also, in our time of shifting conception from education to job training, an increasing uncertainty in what "college" and "educated" mean.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:31:49 PM PDT

  •  I think college educated people support the Tea (4+ / 0-)

    Party because a Bachelor's or Associate's degree today is about worth what a High School Diploma was worth 40 years ago (or even thirty) and is even less broad in scope as that HS Diploma was in those days.

    College has ceased to become about education and has become a "gateway drug to prosperity". The HS Diploma has become about "can we give you a low wage job and you know how to obey".

    It's not about education. Not a bit. It's exactly like the diarist suggests: socioeconomic demographics and control.

    The Academy has lived up to Lenin's old saying about it: "It's not the brains of the nation, rather, it's shit."

    SPES MEA IN DEO EST.

    by commonmass on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:40:05 PM PDT

    •  I fear you're on to something with this (5+ / 0-)
      College has ceased to become about education and has become a "gateway drug to prosperity". The HS Diploma has become about "can we give you a low wage job and you know how to obey".
      The education system today is all about getting just enough training to do your job. Be it an engineer, teacher, lawyer, plumber, or burger flipper. With many institutions becoming nothing more than diploma mills that saddle their students with 20-30 years of loan payments.

      I talk to twenty-somethings just out of college and if the topic isn't something they covered in the last semester (or related to the latest TV show fad) they don't know jack about it. The concept of a "broad, liberal education" is all but gone from our schools. Sacrificed on the altar of cramming as many students cattle thru the school feed lot as possible.

      GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.

      by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:53:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Book smarts don't necessarily impact personality (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now, blueoasis

    I didn't go to medical school - in part - because I became entirely disillusioned with the majority of pre-med peers in college who were there to do so for financial rewards, alone.  They tended to be selfish pricks, as well.

    "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

    by wader on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:54:22 PM PDT

  •  Ethics and Civility aren't required for a degree (4+ / 0-)

    and if they were, many folks would find a way to challenge the requirement.

    Wouldn't take all that long to teach, if people were willing to learn.

    The Rabbi Hillel said a couple of thousand years ago, when challenged to recite the Torah while standing on one foot:

    "That which is hateful to you, do not do to another. That IS the Torah, all else is commentary".
    To achieve that would be worthy of a Masters Degree.

    Inside of me are two dogs. One is mean and evil. The other is gentle and good. The two dogs fight all the time. Which dog wins? The one I feed the most.

    by bakeneko on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 02:58:35 PM PDT

    •  Allow me to note, by way of disclosure (3+ / 0-)

      that I am neither Jewish nor a Christian, and am if anything a cross between a Buddhist and a Taoist. But I think there is much to be learned from many traditions, and I happen to love the quote.

      If I got some detail(s) wrong, my apologies.

      Inside of me are two dogs. One is mean and evil. The other is gentle and good. The two dogs fight all the time. Which dog wins? The one I feed the most.

      by bakeneko on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:03:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I happen to love that quote too, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bakeneko, auapplemac

      thank you so much for sharing it.  I also love a similar one from Jesus:


      One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

      “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

      - Mark 12:28-31New International Version (NIV)

       
      I think that Jesus had deeply contemplated Hillel, and expanded his concept slightly but wonderfully.

      In Luke, there is a different telling of a similar story:

      On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

      “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

      He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

      “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

      -  Luke 10:25-28

      Notice that when Jesus was asked how to obtain salvation, He didn't say "You must believe that I am the Son of God." No, He said "Love God, and Love Your Neighbor".  Then He goes on to tell the story of Good Samaritan, where we learn that Love Your Neighbor really means Love Your Enemy.

      Achieving that should be worth a PhD, I think.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 06:51:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I Think Engineers Are Very Susceptible To This (0+ / 0-)

    It's the mind-set of solving a mathematical proof - here's the first simple answer to a complex problem,  so it's probably the best and only answer.    

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:02:02 PM PDT

  •  Take it from a guy who works with some of the most (4+ / 0-)

    highly educated people in the world, college graduates aren't all smart.  As a matter of fact, many are idiots, willing to engage in "magical thinking" when it suits their interests.

    "Because I am a river to my people."

    by lordcopper on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:13:11 PM PDT

    •  heh...I was in grad school (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordcopper, libera nos, SuWho

      and living in a townhouse apartment next to a bunch of guys studying for MBAs.

      Dumber bunch of dumbfucks you'd never want to meet. Nice? Sure. They were kind to my cat. But oy, were they dumb.

      English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

      by Youffraita on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:32:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There are college educated people who refuse (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis

    to "believe" in evolution (it's not a belief-it's a fact). College educated people believe that man-made climate change is a hoax. I don't know how they can be so thick-headed, but they are.

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:18:59 PM PDT

  •  Interesting study (4+ / 0-)

    Thanks for sharing this study with us. I hadn't seen that.

    The person whose work has tremendously influenced my approach to advocacy is George Lakoff. I highly recommended two of his books in particular: Moral Politics, which provides the overview of how our model of ideal family life shapes our views of society and government, and The Little Blue Book, which has practical advice for Democrats on how to work on changing people's minds.

    His theory is this: that there are two primary models in the U.S. for understanding government and society: the Strict Father and the Nurturant Parent. Both powerfully affect people, because these models provide a moral context for one's beliefs. There is an internal logic to them. People will find a way to interpret things consistent with their strongly held moral views.

    It isn't so much about what information you have, but what you do with it.

    The Strict Father people see a world with a lot of danger, a lot of evil, and they want to raise their children to be able to deal with that. They think competition is good--so they raise the kids to compete successfully so that, in time, the kids will be able to support their own families. They have to learn how to be strong, moral, self-disciplined people, which they learn by following the rules set down by their parents. So these folks would see unsuccessful people as morally flawed: people who didn't learn how to compete, how to do the right thing instead of doing whatever they feel like, and so on. On your head be it if you won't learn those things, that's the concept.

    That's, I think, what we're up against when we're trying to influence Strict Father believers.

    But, on the positive side, Lakoff also says that virtually all Americans are walking around with both models in their heads--Strict Father and Nurturant Parent. People often have some aspects of each, though usually one is dominant. Lakoff notes that some people are one way at work and the other at home: labor leaders might be Nurturant Parent at work, Strict Father at home; professors are often the other way around.

    So what he advises is for Democrats to try to nudge out the Nurturant Parent views of Strict Father people whenever possible--and to do so in whatever part of their experience is NP. The reason: engaging the person's Nurturant Parent views builds the wiring in the brain for NP in general. If somebody's strongest NP aspect relates to the grandkids or their beloved dog or cat, engage them on that.

    Like you, I constantly find myself arguing with people about what the facts are. But what I've learned from Lakoff is to work on locating and supporting their NP attitudes.

    •  Thank you, True North (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SuWho

      The SF and NP attitudes sound fascinating, and really useful.  

      FYI, my daughter came home from school one day talking about how everyone usually has a Yes-Parent and a No-Parent.  So I asked what I was.  "Oh Mom, that's easy.  You're the Yes-Parent.  And Daddy is the No-Parent."  We actually use that concept all the time, and I've learned to say "Ask your father" to compensate for my (sometimes) over-nurturing ways, because apparently I'm a pushover :-)

      I can see how those roles would exist in nearly every family, and so would be tremendously valuable to learn about and tap into.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 07:00:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nurturant Parents (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Older and Wiser Now, SuWho

        I think you'll find Lakoff's analysis really interesting, if you haven't read his work before.

        Both Nurturant Parents and Strict Father parents are trying to raise children who can grow up to be responsible adults, but they see family life, children, and the role of parents differently. Lakoff says that these ideas about family are extrapolated to the nation.

        The Strict Father approach starts with the idea that children are not inherently good. It doesn't mean that SF parents think children are evil--just that they believe that children will always do what feels good, not what is right, if left to their own devices. So the role of the parent--typically (though not necessarily always), the father--is to set the rules and enforce them by punishing children who violate the rules and rewarding those who follow them. The SF is the Moral Authority in the family, and the mother's job is to uphold that with the children. The idea is that children will, in time, learn to do what is right, overcoming their immature desire to do what feels good. Eventually, when they are grown, children become their own Moral Authority and set their own rules. When they are grown, the parents have no right to meddle in their lives. As adults, the kids will sink or swim on their own, which is why it is so important for the children to master self-discipline and competition when they are young.

        The SF sees competition as good. They are raising their children to succeed. Success = Moral Strength. Someone who is not successful is morally weaker than someone who is, so those who reach the top of the heap are more moral, and thus more deserving. They deserve tax breaks because their wealth proves they are better people than the rest of us.

        Strict Fathers tend to see the world as: God over man; man over woman; adults over children.

        The Nurturant Parent also wants to raise children who can grow up to be responsible, self-disciplined, etc., but NPs stress co-operation, empathy, community, and mutual respect. The NPs stress helping each other--both within the family, and within the community. NPs are still making decisions in families with young children, but they encourage children to participate in the discussion of family decisions. One reason to discuss things is that parents can use it as a teachable moment. NPs also think that by treating children with respect and listening to their opinions, you strengthen the children's skills in those same areas. NPs tend to see children as inherently good. They can make mistakes due to their immaturity, but you're constantly trying to help them learn and grow.

        Nurturant Parents do not think that the most moral people are the ones who make the most money. The most moral people are the ones who are caring, helpful, empathetic, concerned about the well-being of everyone in the community, and so on.

        Consider how this might translate to an environmental issue:

        Logging companies vs. spotted owls

        Strict Father: The company and its loggers are just out there trying to support their families, so government should lay off--don't interfere with them. Spotted owls? Why should the government get involved in business decisions just to protect a damned owl or two?

        Nurturant Parent: We have a responsibility to the community and to Mother Earth, so we work to protect the environment.

        Or consider how this translates on abortion:

        Strict Father: They tend to stereotype women who want abortions as teenagers who should have been self-disciplined enough to do the right thing, and not have sex, or women who think careers are more important than motherhood. So if they get pregnant, they should face the consequences and have the baby. They're not going to learn to do what is morally right if they can get off scot-free when they've been morally lax. (On the other hand, women who get pregnant  when they lack the ability to provide for themselves and their babies do not deserve taxpayer-provided benefits like SNAP, even if that increases the chance of live birth and healthy newborns. Other people, who are morally stronger, shouldn't have to part with their money to help an adult woman who is so morally weak that she can't provide for herself and her baby.)

        Nurturant Parent: focuses on the woman. If she is young, her whole life might be affected if she carries the pregnancy to term. NPs wouldn't encourage someone to have an abortion--it is her decision--but would support a woman who makes that decision.

        One reason that I really appreciate Lakoff's work is that it helps me to see the reasoning of each side.

        And I like his advice, in The Little Blue Book, to treat people on "the other side" in a civil, respectful, and, indeed, a friendly way. That's the way I prefer to work with people, face to face. And I think he's right that it is more likely to be successful than yelling at people.

        His point is that anything you do to nourish the Nurturant Parent wiring in the brain of a Strict Father advocate will help the "NP side"--basically, the blue side. And, he says, everybody in America has both these models in their brain, so no matter how NP or SF we might look to others, our brains are wired for both. Lakoff's advice is for us to try to strengthen that NP side whenever we can.

        Sorry to rattle on so long! Needless to say, Lakoff explains everything far better than I can.

        •  You seem very passionate on this topic (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SuWho

          That's a good sign that means something to me.  I really appreciate you taking the time to share these thoughts with me / us !  Thank you!

          If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

          by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 08:29:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry to babble on! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Older and Wiser Now

            I learned so much from Lakoff's approach to this. I have a much better understanding of why people on the other side, and people on our side, approach the issues the way we do.

            More importantly, on both sides, we have strong moral principles at work. As Lakoff has said, people vote against their own self-interest when they are voting for their moral principles.

            For a long time, I felt very frustrated by the "voting against your self-interest" situation because--naturally--I assumed that they would vote MY way if they would just think about their own self-interest.

            It isn't that the Lakoff analysis makes it dead easy to work for change. But his ideas suggest some different ways to tackle it, which might just work better.

            So, yep--I'm a fan.

  •  because they tend to be wealthier (3+ / 0-)

    this should not be news to anyone, a significant proportion of rich educated people have been conservative since forever.

    class matters, folks.

  •  Sort of like aristocrats in the middle ages (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, Older and Wiser Now

    They were "better" than the commoners and they knew it because everyone they talked to said so.

    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

    by gjohnsit on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 03:42:11 PM PDT

    •  OMG! Time for a shameless plug! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gjohnsit, SuWho

      I wrote a diary relatively recently called Left-Wing? Right-Wing? America's "Estates of the Realm": History Repeats Itself Once Again

      the French Estates of the Realm ... consisted of
      • the clergy, a.k.a. the First Estate - "those who pray" (and had the most power in the eternal realm, the afterlife) [Historically this estate has also jostled for significant power in the temporal realm as well, since being able to doom anyone's soul to hell for eternity turns out to be a really big stick that can powerfully manipulate the political attitude of the living]),
      • the nobles, a.k.a. the Second Estate - "those who fight" (and had the most money and power in the temporal realm, the here and now]), and
      • the common people, a.k.a. the Third Estate - "those who work" (in other words, those with the least money and power in the land, the schmucks)
      Perhaps you might like it.  I see a lot of things in terms of Second Estate and Third Estate these days ...

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 07:06:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  1. Greed and delusion. 2. Racism. 3. Inherent.... (0+ / 0-)

    ... tendency toward obnoxious asshole behavior.

  •  What I want to know is why so many (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis

    medical school graduates are teabaggers.

    “If you want to do something evil, put it inside something boring." -- John Oliver

    by jim304 on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:20:02 PM PDT

  •  Another study discussed in Salon included results (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, Older and Wiser Now

    from a recent Yale study:

    For Republicans, having a college degree didn’t appear to make one any more open to what scientists have to say. On the contrary, better-educated Republicans were more skeptical of modern climate science than their less educated brethren. Only 19 percent of college-educated Republicans agreed that the planet is warming due to human actions, versus 31 percent of non-college-educated Republicans.  For Democrats and Independents, the opposite was the case....

    For one thing, well-informed or well-educated conservatives probably consume more conservative news and opinion.... Thus, they are more likely to know what they’re supposed to think about the issues—what people like them think—and to be familiar with the arguments or reasons for holding these views. If challenged, they can then recall and reiterate these arguments. They’ve made them a part of their identities, a part of their brains, and in doing so, they’ve drawn a strong emotional connection between certain “facts” or claims, and their deeply held political values.

     http://www.salon.com/...

    The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right. -- Judge Learned Hand, May 21, 1944

    by ybruti on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 04:44:38 PM PDT

    •  Thank you for sharing this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SuWho, ybruti

      It seems to agree with the research in this diary: "For one thing, well-informed or well-educated conservatives probably consume more conservative news and opinion."

      I also have a personal theory that "fear of ex-communication" is a big factor with the right.  To be shunned by one's formerly loving community because you have been identified as a "heretic" is a terrifying thought.  It is important to know what the "right thoughts" are, and hold fast to them in order to remain a member in good standing.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 07:11:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Salon article drew a contrast between (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Older and Wiser Now

        conservatives and liberals. While conservatives cling to "deeply held political values" and are unswayed by facts:

        Liberals... really do seem to like facts; it seems to be part of who they are....liberals tend to be more flexible and open to new ideas—so that’s a possible factor lying behind these data. In fact, recent evidence suggests that wanting to explore the world and try new things, as opposed to viewing the world as threatening, may subtly push people toward liberal ideologies (and vice versa). http://www.salon.com/...

        The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right. -- Judge Learned Hand, May 21, 1944

        by ybruti on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 07:39:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Colleges don't Educate, they Indoctrinate (0+ / 0-)

    The United States higher education Industry is the propaganda arm for the corporations.

    People are run through the mill, lined up for corporate duty and taught not to question the supreme intelligence of the degreed.

    Then they enter the corporate world predisposed to execute the bidding of their masters.

    colleges are the right wing brainwashing system that enables the corrupt corporations to flourish in the modern age.

    Haha and you thought universities taught 'critical thinking skills'

    I am amazed that all college graduates are not teabaggers.

  •  recently I told a commenter who claimed an (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kasoru, Older and Wiser Now

    advanced degree yet had difficulty on an eighth grade test that maybe the test was too tough for her. I got roundly hr'd. There are plenty of idiots with advanced degrees on both the left and the right. The one's on the right just seem to have more money.

    One reason to find substance is tea party ideology is if it's in your economic  self interest. Also the upper middle class has been burdened with the lion's share of taxes while the upper class skates. I'm talking about the 75k to 200K types. They make enough so they pay a lot, but mostly it's in wages. Once people start bringing in a half million or more they tend to have it in capital gains or other ways of not paying much in taxes.

    We have so many poor now that our tax base is hurting. The rich don't want to pay, so the modestly well off do.

    I never make assumptions about conservatives being morally inferior. I've lived in very conservative places for many years, they make the best neighbors and friends, just can't talk politics.

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 05:07:58 PM PDT

    •  "One reason to find substance is tea party (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ban nock

      ideology is if it's in your economic  self interest."

      Completely agree.  As far as I can tell, whether one's taxes go up or down is the driving interest of those on the right.  All the rest is spin, as far as I can tell.  "Follow the Money" is a compelling piece of advice to find out who will benefit from proposed legislation, and how much they will benefit.

      I agree with the rest of your post too.  I'm sorry that you can't talk openly either.  Sometimes I feel as if I'm being strangled when that happens to me (especially with my folks, though).

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 07:18:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rural people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now

    I've run into the assumption that in rural areas, there is more Exducationalracism and more segregation, perhaps more educational level segregation.  That isn't necessarily true.  

    My experience is limited, but since I've lived one mile from a town of 600 for 35 years, I'll just speak to that experience.  There are quite a few jobs here that take a college degree, such as federal and state jobs.  There are some farmers I know who have gone to college, 2 & 4 year degrees, and one I know has a masters.  I know a person who drives a snow plow/road grader for a living who has a college degree.  The man who built our house has a degree in electrical engineering.  Of course, there are many teachers, primarily, women, who have at least a BA, most get a masters eventually.  There are the many jobs at the hospital and clinic that take at least a BS degree, some a masters, such as the PT and OT positions.  Of course, the 6 doctors have their MDs.  And so many who have retired here have advanced degrees.

    The Educational backgrounds of so many who live here, but have jobs that might be considered "more humble" have surprised me.  People CHOOSE to live here, and that makes a difference;  It is a beautiful area.  And Minnesota, in general, is rated near the top in education compared to other states.  

    And, in general, this area tends to vote Democratic, or DFL, as we say.  But as elsewhere, the GOP has made gains in both our area and suburban areas of MN.  

    Green and buzzy (mosquitoes.)

    by Andy Cook on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 05:31:01 PM PDT

  •  How do you avoid meeting people who (0+ / 0-)

    don't have the same education level as you if you're a college graduate?  Do you never need a plumber?  Aren't there parents in your son's boy scout troop who are auto mechanics?  The aide in the nursing home taking care of your Aunt has an MBA?  The barrista getting your coffee is really an electrical engineer with a PhD who is only working at Starbucks until she can get a full professorship at Cal Tech?  I don't understand it.

    •  I think the study was focusing more on (0+ / 0-)

      who you primarily interact with than who you occasionally interact with.  

      And as I think more about it, you need to "know" the people enough to have a certain level of conversation with them.  You might not have such conversations with a plumber or a barrista, though I imagine that an aide in a nursing home would probably have many significant exchanges with your Aunt.

      The greater the level of the interactions with those in other educational circles, the more opportunity to have understanding and empathy for their situations.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 10:28:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You have rediscovered (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now

    the Dunning-Kruger effect.

    I have also noticed that my most brilliant friends tend to be the most humble, ironically: my theory is that those folks have a greater "knowledge" of the vastness of their ignorance in terms of what could potentially be known.
    It goes back to Socrates, who doubted the Delphic Oracle, according to Plato's account, when she said that nobody in Greece was wiser than Socrates. He said that he concluded that those who had great knowledge, but thought that they knew much more, were less wise than he, knowing only his own ignorance.

    Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

    by Mokurai on Thu Jul 24, 2014 at 11:19:32 PM PDT

  •  Tea Party lacks good history (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now

    Apparently the Tea Party knows nothing about the conditions before and during the great depression. They missed entirely, the whole section about Herbert Hoover and the Hoovervilles. They missed the part about union struggles and the gains of the middle class. They probably never had an uncle that was a hobo. So, regardless of their education level, they are still people of ignorance.

  •  a member in good standing... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now

    [---It is important to know what the "right thoughts" are, and hold fast to them in order to remain a member in good standing.]

    the question of why people vote for REPUBLICANS perhaps has many answers.  i would guess the quote at the top here is the most common reason.  they overlook facts that contradict their opinions because of their ignorance of reality.  they believe what the media tells them.  finding out the truth takes a lot of work, and most of the time is is painful.

    they have a very simplistic understanding of politics based on the idea that since you can’t have everything, you opt for what is most important.  then you swallow hard and accept the bad with the good.

    in my experience, most people can’t imagine the magnitude of corruption in government, that people we once trusted, like OBAMA, that he be lying to us and withholding truth.  or  HILLARY, or KERRY or McCAIN or PAUL RYAN.  

    T-party types are bonded together by what might be best described by the term “patriotism,”  the idea of a “strong America” based on good, old fashioned self reliance and strong family values.  then throw in a big heaping of capitalism.

    nevermind that all of this amounts to nothing more than a set of romanticized fantasies.  none of it is based on the present reality in our country where the whole of government has been taken over by corrupt corporate interests by means of big money in an effort to increase their power and wealth.

    •  You raise many good points (0+ / 0-)

      Might I add that the founding fathers intentionally created a system of checks and balances because they didn't trust the soul of man.  Good idea, but one of the unintentional consequences is that when government doesn't seem to work, it's difficult to place accountability for it.  Fingers get pointed everywhere, each base tends to believe what the leaders in their party tell them, and the rascals who actually caused the problems escape facing responsibility for their actions.

      The right gets upset by the inefficiencies of government (which were intentionally put there by the FF) and then claim to be the "only true patriots" enamored with the Constitution.  They are ignorant about how our government was actually designed to work.

      If a small minority of people is now stealthily ruling what was previously a democratic country, and "the people" don't seem to realize it, should anyone bother to tell them?

      by Older and Wiser Now on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 09:49:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  TP 50% C. Right. 3/4 US believe virgin birth of J. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Older and Wiser Now

    On the brighter side, 30% of Americans under 30 are religiously unaffiliated. Brighter days ahead but I won't be here to appreciate them. Until then, the Democrats will continue to let the GOP control the House and Senate by not getting the poor registered and voting. It seems like such a waste of campaign dollars to miss that simple concept. Why bother to ask for donations if they are going to continue to screw it up every time. DCCC-Worthless.

    In 2010-37% of eligible American voters voted for their U.S. Reps. (Census) The 1% is not taking this country from us. We are giving it to them.

    by Incredulousinusa on Fri Jul 25, 2014 at 08:06:46 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site