On Political Standpoints of People — An UnScientific Analysis
Interactions with people have made me understand one thing when it comes to people and how their political opinions are formed.
Almost entirety of one’s political standpoints seem to reflect the experiences one has had in life. They are neither objective, nor topical/ideological, but primarily personal.
Of course, there seem to be exceptions to the rule, but they are extremely rare.
And I have seen four major approaches to formulation of political opinions in folks —
- Experiential Reaffirmative — The kind of opinions that one forms based on experiential reaffirmation of their interpretations of the world. Mostly confirmation bias.
Example ~ “I think it is a good thing to control ‘miscreants’ belonging to “insert-an-identity-here”.”
- Experiential Guilt Derivative — The kind of opinions that one forms based on a sort of survivor’s guilt, or the guilt of the lucky. These are the sort of people who reject their experiences and benefits as immoral and tend to reach the extreme opposite conclusions.
Example ~ “I think you are oblivious to the suffering of “insert-an-identity-here” because of your privilege.”
While actually, such commentator, often might be from a background of opulence, who feels guilty of having had a better life than the ones under her/his socio-economic status. And most of his/her standpoints comes from the pervasive guilt which drives an obsession for compensatory action, irrespective of the ramifications of one’s own behaviour on others.
- Emotive Aspirational — Here, the core belief systems of the individual seem to revolve around certain core aspirations, and the emotions that the passion for such aspirations invoke, irrespective of whether the idea itself possesses merit or not.
Example ~ “But that’s not fair!” types. Who would rather bend reality to their needs, than fix their aspirations while keeping reality in mind. The sort who truly believe incremental change will lead to highly desirable future.
- Trauma Reactionary — The individuals who have experienced certain very impacting experiences, often traumatic, and/or at times unsettling, develop belief systems as a reaction to such experiences.
Example ~ “I don’t think people who are “insert-an-identity-here” should be allowed to “insert-a-freedom-getting-revoked-here”.” This sort of individual seems to have had a really impactful experience which made her/him wary of certain behaviours or certain attitudes, or certain identities.
Now, the actual political thought, the way ancient Greeks worked upon, seems to be all but lost in the current age of decadence, wherein everybody seems to be in love with stubborn opinions based upon their own core belief systems, which everyone claim to have objectivity and reason, but if you look at the the person saying it, his/her life, past, present, etc., the beliefs would then seem nothing more than mere reflections of their existence and identity.
And so far, I found that very few political leaders, philosophers, ideologues, and/or students remain, who can disassociate their experience, their memories from their interpretations, their conclusions, and find more equitable answers.
I am not very sure as to how more folks can become equitable, objective, and observational, rather than reactionary. But I honestly believe it’s quintessential to reduce the degenerative political rot in the 21st Century World.