Tribalism In Politics
How Political Bias Blinds People To Facts
People tend to play favorites when it comes to politics. They are convinced that “their side” is correct and “the other” is wrong.
Due to political bias, they cannot accept that “their side” could be wrong or “the other side” could be right.
This creates division, and a lot of it is due to a genetic fallacy.
A genetic fallacy is where you judge something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came.
People who fall victim to genetic fallacies are also victims of indoctrination because their bias blinds them.
They are notoriously guilty of voting “down the line” for either Democrats or Republicans because they’re so closely tied to their political affiliation.
When we deem someone or something as “all good” or “all bad,” and we allow that to dictate our judgment, we are being fallacious.
To help me point this out, I found some examples online.
Example 1
From a quick Google search, I was able to find two articles.
The first article is from Washington Monthly and written by Paul Glastris, Ryan Cooper, and Siyu Hu. It’s titled, “Obama’s Top 50 Accomplishments.”
Six of these fifty accomplishments mention bills that he signed. For example,
2. Passed the Stimulus: Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression. Weeks after stimulus went into effect, unemployment claims began to subside. Twelve months later, the private sector began producing more jobs than it was losing, and it has continued to do so for twenty-three straight months, creating a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs.
The second article is posted in the New York Times and written by Farah Stockman. It’s titled, “A Fact-Checked List Of Trump Accomplishments.”
Many of the facts in this article mention bills that Trump signs, but the credit is given to Congress via the opinion of Stockton, unlike the Obama article.
For example…
14. Trump signed the Save our Seas Act which funds $10 million per year to clean tons of plastic & garbage from the ocean.
“True. The credit for the passage of this legislation goes to a bipartisan group in Congress, namely Senator Dan Sullivan, a Republican from Alaska, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island, and Senator Cory Booker, a Democrat from New Jersey.”
In nearly every accomplishment that included Trump signing a bill, Stockton made a point to ensure readers were aware that Congress was primarily responsible.
Some may give credit and consider signing bills a form of Presidential accomplishment and some may not. That would be an opinion entitled to whoever is making the judgment, or in this case, writing the article.
I’m okay with either one; however, people tend to change their standard for “accomplishment” based on who is accomplishing it.
Stockman later posted a follow-up article titled, “What I Learned From A List Of Trump Accomplishments | Facts are vital. But they are not sufficient.”
In this follow-up article, she claims the reason she compiled the original article was because, “A friend asked me to because she didn’t believe this list could be true, and she was upset that someone she respected had posted it.”
Her friend’s assumption that a list of accomplishments from Trump couldn’t be accurate was a biased opinion due to a genetic fallacy.
This highlights the problem and my point of the article. Her friend could not accept that Trump did positive things while he was in office because it was Donald Trump who did them.
Stockton continues, “One by one, I researched the claims, reaching out to people and institutions for a better understanding. At times, I wondered why I was even bothering. Studies suggest that fact-checks only matter on the margins, changing minds between 10 and 20 percent of the time.”
I wonder why facts don’t change most people’s minds. Could it be because they are victims of genetic fallacies?
Stockman concludes, “…we live in such a polarized era that political party affiliation is as strong as religious identity.”
Exactly. I agree.
Example 2
There was an article posted in the Washington Post in July of 2021 titled, “What Trump Got Right.”
Now, this title is entirely subjective because different people have different ideas on what is “right” based on their political views.
With that said, I want to quote a comment on this article.
“I sincerely doubt Donnie came up with any of that. He was way too distracted with lying, trying to be a celebrity and treason.”
To completely turn your nose up at the facts, and “sincerely doubt Donnie came up with any of that” is the essence of a genetic fallacy.
This person denies the facts because they’d have to admit Trump did some positive things.
The hate for Trump clouds people’s mind’s to the point they cannot admit he did anything constructive because Donald Trump is the one who did it.
Example 3
Alternatively, the love for Trump is so strong that people are unable to admit he does anything negative because of the fact it’s Donald Trump.
I saw a headline today that said, “Local GOP leader says Trump indictment won't affect his support.”
If that’s not an example of a genetic fallacy, I don’t know what is.
Example 4
Trump lies a lot, and his supporters tend to ignore it. I will share a couple of lies that stood out to me.
Remember when Trump was running for President against Hillary Clinton? He said some pretty vile things about her and accused her of crimes. Remember the emails?
Shortly after he was elected, Trump did a ‘60 Minutes’ interview with Lesley Stahl. She asked if he planned on following through with locking up Hillary Clinton, and this was his response:
“I don’t want to hurt them,” he said, referring to the Clintons. “They’re good people.” (Source: LA Times)
Trump lied again when he promised to “drain the swamp” and then filled every position of power with career politicians.
According to The Washington Post, “just 31 percent [of people] said Trump is honest and trustworthy.”
If this is correct, I’m sure it has dropped since then because that article was written in April 2020. This would mean less than 31% of people find Trump honest.
Yet many people still love him because he’s Donald Trump.
And finally, in 2016 Trump said,
“I could shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”
(source: NPR)
He’s probably right. Why? Because he’s Donald Trump.
Conclusion
When Hillary Clinton kept classified information, the Republicans wanted to lock her up, and the Democrats tried to justify it.
When Donald Trump kept classified information, the Democrats wanted to lock him up, and the Republicans tried to justify it.
Both Trump and Hillary took classified information they were unauthorized to have; yet the same people who blamed one gave the other a pass.
This is the most precise form of tribalism I’ve ever seen.
I used Trump as an example in this article because he is severely loved or hated, depending on which side of the political fence someone resides.
However, Trump is just a placeholder for my demonstration, and the examples I shared highlight the importance of remaining intellectually honest.
The ability to find common ground is essential for progress. If we aren’t willing to set aside our bias and acknowledge we may be wrong, we’ll continuously be stuck in an endless cycle of one-sided politics.
I firmly believe that many members of Congress are victims of genetic fallacies because they will only support something if it comes from “their guy” or “their side.” This is why every vote is nearly a 50/50 split and anything productive rarely happens.
This problem is widespread and not unique to political issues. If people could learn to avoid logical fallacies, it would lead to more meaningful, productive conversations and actions in all walks of life.