Mar13
About Author
Comments
jswagner 9 years ago
Yes, very helpful, thanks. There are a thousand ways we all must say that kindness and understanding is the way to go. I especially appreciate the mention of Trump’s fans’ fears, and an acknowledgement that we should address them as best we can.
The Independent Whig 9 years ago
This might have been credible if it were written about uncivil, smug, sanctimonious “you didn’t build that” and “cling to their guns and their religion” Obama. Eight years of that crap and NOW you counsel cooler heads? Give me a flip pin’ break. Incivility by the left is so de rigeuer in this leftist dominated culture (education, entertainment, media) that it’s invisible.
MUCH Too little and MUCH to late Ravi.
Trump is a REACTION to, not a cause of, incivility.
Take off your moral blinders and get a clue.
Peter Morain 9 years ago
How did you even end up here? Civil Politics seems like a weird place to be trolling.
The Independent Whig 9 years ago
One man’s trolling is another man’s speaking truth to power.
My main point is completely valid and I stand by it. Ravi seems like a nice enough guy who is earnest and means well. His analysis is fine as far as it goes but it seems to me that he’s closing the barn door after the horse is gone, AND he’s looking in the exact wrong direction for answers. I don’t mean to pick on Ravi per se. But his article is an example of a massive, elephant in the room type of problem that’s hiding in plain sight that very few will talk about, or even acknowledge; even here at CivilPolitics which is ostensibly about doing exactly that, and about doing things like trying to “drain some of the heat, anger, and divisiveness out of these topics” through the use of empirical evidence and clear logic.
The double standard in modern American culture is astonishing. It infects even CivilPolitcs.
It’s the left that in actual fact riots in the streets when the world does not comply with its “grand narrative” of the culture of victimhood and oppression. From the French Revolution to Ferguson to Baltimore to “What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want it? NOW?” to the assassination of cops sitting in their cars in NYC to the SJW crazies that are taking over college campuses, the coddled mind of the WEIRD thinking left sets the bar of uncivil, bigoted, narrow minded, “my way or the highway,” fascistic thinking and behavior so high that it’s practically invisible. To the left, uncivil thought and behavior like all of the above is justified, righteous, de rigueur. This is the water of American culture we all swim in.
Leftists dominate all three major arenas of cultural agenda setting and control: media, entertainment, and education. Leftist hegemony over the culture sets the Overton Window so far to the left that moderate centrists are often perceived and depicted as angry extremist nuts. See, for example, Krugman’s assessment of HeterodoxAcademy. QED.
And when, finally, a candidate comes along who reacts to that, and says “enough is enough,” and points out the fact that the water is polluted, and when millions of people who feel disenfranchised by the lopsided culture that makes heroes out of street thugs and villains out of public servants who put their lives on the line to protect the rights of those very same street thugs rise up in support of that candidate, it’s the CANDIDATE and his SUPPORTERS who are perceived as as uncivil?
And CivilPolitics writes about THEM?
It’s unconscionable.
If it were not for “The Righteaous Mind,” and the three principles of moral psychology, the third of which is “morality binds and blinds,” I’d be dumbfounded in any attempt to understand or explain how the hell the world can be so morally upside down.
The centerpiece paper of HeterodoxAcademy.org, “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science” describes how leftist values are invisibly embedded in the language, assumptions, and analyses of the social sciences, and how it insidiously damages the science and the credibility of the field.
Focusing on Trump’s incivility in the face of an entire culture that for decades has exemplified incivility toward anyone and everyone it considers to think wrong thoughts is a bright and clear example of exactly that.
The Independent Whig 9 years ago
The left practically riots at Trump AND Sanders rallies and the story is about Trump???!!!!
Morality blinds.
chizwoz 9 years ago
This is the best explanation I’ve read on the subject.
I don’t support Trump either. But everytime someone comes out and calls him racist, I like him more than I like them. Part of his appeal is that he’s pushing back on the overton window that’s been created by people who don’t represent the average person.
The fact that he’s got demonized for being against illegal immigration is such a perfect example of the problem. You’re supposed to be against illegal things for God’s sake!
Sergio 9 years ago
If you are in Trump´s rally and he ask “Who will pay for the wall (border mexican wall)?, Will you agree and respond: “Mexico”?
chizwoz 9 years ago
Lol what?
Are you just asking if I think Mexico will pay for the wall? Well I doubt he’ll win anyway. And I don’t know enough about the economic relationship between the 2 countries to know if the US could really get Mexico to do that.
My intuition is that no, they wouldn’t. And Trump probably already knows that. He just likes making very grand boasting promises.
Sergio 9 years ago
oh, thank you. My question was not about if you believe if Mexico would pay for the wall, but to ask you, 1) What motivates (morals behind) Trump’s supporters to respond, generally in mass, “Mexico” – do you respond that? do you find a similar situation where you respond in mass to a specific nation/race/etc.? 2) what motivate Trump to make such a claim over such specific nation
(Mexico) /nationality (Mexican rapists, – ok, not all, but it implies),
beyond the political gain?;
chizwoz 9 years ago
I’m afraid I don’t know enough about the issues of immigration in the US to really understand what motivates it! Maybe it’s a legitimate problem that’s being overexaggerated. Or maybe it’s just not a real problem at all. Hard to say. Both tend to happen!
Che Fc 9 years ago
The use of the term “divisive rhetoric”, suggests
that a “union rhetoric” could exist, and that’s yet to be proven. There’s
no rhetoric that can bring everyone together, in any situation, anywhere in the
world, in any historical time.
You have very good studies where you focus in analyzing different patterns in
which people deal with politics, situations and moral values. However, your
faith in a world where all people would be able to live in a civilized way,
respecting their differences without increasingly escalation and animosity
complete ignores fundamental differences between people and groups that,
ironically, your studies point in a very accurate way.
It is important for you to understand the degree to which your
capacity to “forge positive empathic relationships” is limited by diverse
factors, like cognitive limitations expressed by significant IQ differences
between groups around the world, religious preferences, completely opposite
(and that often jeopardize each other) values, among other fundamental
differences between human beings and the groups they belong.
Whirled Peas 9 years ago
Jerry Seinfeld seems to agree with you! http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/10/jerry-seinfeld-explains-the-perfect-way-to-handle-donald-trump/
I agree with you also, and thank you for being a voice of reason in an otherwise crazy situation.