[A]uthoritarians are known to be high on the need for closure, yet another trait that’s linked to defensiveness and biased reasoning. The need for closure, notes Arie Kruglanski, means being more likely to look for belief affirmation (confirmation bias). It also means being more likely to defend one’s existing beliefs, to lash out against challenges to those beliefs (disconfirmation bias), and to persist in beliefs in the face of challenge. *
We’re all “guilty” of similar behaviors and psychological adaptations to help get us through our day, so in principle the fact that authoritarians have their own devices is not surprising. But as with any such shortcut, when and how those adaptations are utilized, and for what reasons, matters a great deal. As The Donald Show has demonstrated quite convincingly, this personality/psychological inclination should not be on anyone’s list of Top Ten Most Admirable Traits.
That authoritarians seem almost entirely oblivious to their inclinations and the impact their behaviors and comments have on others is among the more disturbing aspects of what Trump has unleashed in full bloom. There’s always the hope that his supporters will soon Wake The Fuck Up!, but we shouldn’t be holding our breaths. Sharing our observations so that the fence-sitters might ponder the What Happens Then? if Trump prevails should be an obvious tactic.
There is a much greater concern when employing the Trump-energized strategies for matters of great complexity—those involving competing interests; differing perspectives and needs; different levels of understanding, etc. In almost any matter of national significance relating to culture, religion, politics, economics and a host of interrelated issues, taking the short road from Point A to Point B carries many more risks than most would realize.
Boiling down the climate change debate, or the rights of same-sex couples, or income equality, or Take Your Pick Of Issues, to one or two handy cheat-sheet talking point memos may appeal to those in need of prompt closure. But we usually ignore reality and facts to our eventual detriment. Is that wise?
Our society is far more complex, with many more interrelated components, than in recent history. The same will surely be said decades from now as well. The great variety of perspectives, interests, needs, preferences, values, beliefs, fears, and every other consideration appropriate to matters with the potential for widespread impact—good or bad—cannot by definition be the focus of a few key bullet points, if effective and enduring solutions are the main objective.
The flip side is it becomes all too easy to get bogged down in the individual details and thus quickly lose sight of what’s most important. But if the full range of facts and considerations are not even brought to the table to help decision-makers find the best possible alternative to move at least one step forward, what exactly is the benefit? If the only advantage in preserving a status quo is to delay doing anything, the primary achievement will be to ensure the difficulties have been compounded. That means more will be impacted, and only a few will find that satisfactory.
That’s not the ideal state of affairs for about 99% of us. It will remain the ideal for the few as long as the many choose to either remain silent or decide that it’s too much trouble to learn more. Understandable of course. It’s not like we all have an overabundance of free time to examine the fine points of these types of issues—we elect or hire people to do that for us.
But when their motivations for “honoring” their responsibilities are entirely inconsistent with those placing their trust in them, we have problems. Those of us who share concerns about our future oil supply are confronted daily with the opposition from powerful corporate interests determined to preserve their financial benefits—regardless of the costs which in time will be imposed on all of us. They have their own media and politicians all dutifully toeing the corporate line by avoiding the facts, massaging the cherry-picked ones to suit their purposes, offering vague but surely impressive statements meant to be taken as facts—among their primary tactics.
That’s no different a strategy than was employed by the tobacco industry and now with the climate change deniers. It’s not a coincidence.
So until and unless the general public takes it upon itself to start considering not just the facts but both the motivations of those disseminating information and reassurances—as well as appreciating to a much greater degree What Happens Then? if the status quo remains the status quo tomorrow—we are buying ourselves many more challenges, problems, and conflict somewhere down the road.
Insight and planning now can help take away the sting, but it won’t happen on its own.
The Donald’s endless supply of outright fabrications is doing none of us any good in the long-term, and for most of the short-term as well. A bit of introspection could go a long way….
Note: This series resumes 09.08.16
Adapted from a recent blog post of mine
* from The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science - and Reality by Chris Mooney Wiley; 1st edition (April 1, 2012)