This book review was written by Eugene Kernes
“We are so locked into our political identities that there is virtually no candidate, no information, no condition, that can force us to change our minds. We will justify almost anything or anyone so long as it helps our side, and the result is a politics devoid of guardrails, standards, persuasion, or accountability.” – Ezra Klein, Introduction: What Didn’t Happen, Page 9
“Society needs lots of different kinds of people, with lots of different kinds of psychologies, to thrive. There are times when a mistrust of outsiders is necessary for a culture to repel a threat. There are times when enthusiasm about change is the only thing standing between a society and stagnation. Open isn’t better than closed. Conscientious is a trait, not a compliment. Evolutionarily, the power is in the mix of outlooks, not in any one outlook – that’s why this psychological diversity has survived.” – Ezra Klein, Chapter 2: The Dixiecrat Dilemma, Page 53
“I want to dwell on this for a minute, because it’s an
insane finding: being better at math made partisans less likely to solve
the problem correctly when solving the problem correctly meant betraying their
political instincts. People weren’t
reasoning to get the right answer; they were reasoning to get the answer that
they wanted to be right.” – Ezra Klein, Chapter, Page 91
Is This An Overview?
There was a time in American politics that the different
parties appeared to be similar. Party
affiliation was not a signifier of principles and perspectives of the
individual members. There was a want for
polarization of the parties, to enable voters to differentiate the
parties. With the advent of more data
about voters, the parties were able to target voters and develop ideologies
that would better sort voters into the parties.
A self-reinforcing positive feedback cycle of politicians appealing to a
more polarized public, which polarizes the public further. The polarization has become so effective,
that Americans have become locked into political identities. Voters are no longer persuadable to change
their mind due to candidate behavior, or policy initiatives. Elections have become about motivating the
people who already agree with party ideology, to go vote. Supreme Court judges are chosen for party
loyalty rather than merit.
Polarization creates polarization, but not necessarily
extremism. People defer to group
decisions because groups collectively know more than any individual, making
group decisions more likely to be accurate.
People override their personal views about a policy in favor of the
group’s decisions. This has the effect
of seeking to validate evidence of group’s ideas, while opposing the decisions
of other groups. Rather than seeking to
have the appropriate answers, people reason to an answer that supports their
group. For partisans, an expert becomes
someone credentialed that agrees with the partisan.
Among the causes of problems of polarization, is the
weaponization of identity. Individuals
have diverse identities, but political identities have become amplified and
prominent. Those not in the group,
become treated with skepticism and hostility.
People care less about their party, but will vote for their party
because of their dislike of the opposing party.
Policies that initially have bipartisan support due to merit, become
partisan when a party makes the policy their own. Society needs psychological diversity, but
the parties have become psychologically homogenous. There is less ideological overlap within the
groups.
Caveats?
This book is focused on the system of politics, not on the
individuals or groups. The individuals
and groups become simplified. There are
explanations that need to be refined, to prevent misunderstandings. There are limits to how to manage the
problems with polarization.
