On Presidents Day, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene recommended a “national divorce.”
Despite Taylor Greene’s history of outspoken utterances, both parties were surprised by the proposal.
“I never want a civil war in America. “Everyone I know would never want that—but it’s moving that route, and we have to do something about it,” Taylor Greene said in a follow-up interview.
“Everyone I talk to is fed up with the left bullying, abusing, and disrespecting.”
These claims will likely perplex most left-leaners. Taylor Greene didn’t show that she knows the left’s political conflict reasons.
In political and nonpolitical disagreements, misconceptions like this can lead to hatred.
However individuals rarely consider that their emotions might be inaccurate, like their viewpoints on a factual topic. Can feelings be wrong?
I am a behavioral economist who investigates biases in opinion formation, and in my forthcoming book, “Undue Hatred,” I argue that we overly resent individuals we disagree with on both political and nonpolitical issues for several reasons.
Mistakenly disliking someone
Jane, a Democrat, overestimates the probability her Republican neighbor Joe does or says anything negative. Jane may overstate Joe’s gun control resistance or anger against her.
Jane may dislike Joe due of these ideas. Since these ideas are wrong, Jane would loathe Joe more than she should by her own standards.
For numerous reasons, individuals tend to make this error when disputing. This inclination toward excessive emotional polarization is called “affective polarization bias.” Emotionally antagonistic polarization is called “affective polarization.”
I evaluate research on people’s beliefs about the rival political party’s viewpoints to find evidence of this prejudice. In trials with monetary stakes, I additionally test opinions about the selfishness of the other party’s choices.
My study demonstrates that people continually underestimate their political rivals. Both sides exaggerate the other’s fanaticism, antagonism, political violence, and selfishness. The most emotionally polarized make the largest blunders.
On Presidents Day, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene recommended a “national divorce.”
Despite Taylor Greene’s history of outspoken utterances, both parties were surprised by the proposal.
“I never want a civil war in America. “Everyone I know would never want that—but it’s moving that route, and we have to do something about it,” Taylor Greene said in a follow-up interview.
“Everyone I talk to is fed up with the left bullying, abusing, and disrespecting.”
These claims will likely perplex most left-leaners. Taylor Greene didn’t show that she knows the left’s political conflict reasons.
In political and nonpolitical disagreements, misconceptions like this can lead to hatred.
However individuals rarely consider that their emotions might be inaccurate, like their viewpoints on a factual topic. Can feelings be wrong?
I am a behavioral economist who investigates biases in opinion formation, and in my forthcoming book, “Undue Hatred,” I argue that we overly resent individuals we disagree with on both political and nonpolitical issues for several reasons.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in Manhattan Criminal Court for his arraignment.
On April 4, 2023, former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in Manhattan Criminal Court for his arraignment. Trump becomes the first ex-president to be indicted.
Jane, a Democrat, overestimates the probability her Republican neighbor Joe does or says anything negative. Jane may overstate Joe’s gun control resistance or anger against her.
Jane may dislike Joe due of these ideas. Since these ideas are wrong, Jane would loathe Joe more than she should by her own standards.
For numerous reasons, individuals tend to make this error when disputing. This inclination toward excessive emotional polarization is called “affective polarization bias.” Emotionally antagonistic polarization is called “affective polarization.”
I evaluate research on people’s beliefs about the rival political party’s viewpoints to find evidence of this prejudice. In trials with monetary stakes, I additionally test opinions about the selfishness of the other party’s choices.
My study demonstrates that people continually underestimate their political rivals. Both sides exaggerate the other’s fanaticism, antagonism, political violence, and selfishness. The most emotionally polarized make the largest blunders.
On October 12, 2019, the “Rod of Iron Freedom Festival” in Greeley, Pennsylvania, the public shoots AR-15 rifles and other firearms at a shooting range. Kahr Arms/Tommy Gun Warehouse and Rod of Iron Ministries host the “second amendment rally and celebration of freedom, religion and family.”
Explanations
Most individuals understand excessive dislike, but “affective polarization bias” is novel.
The rise of cable, internet, and social media is often cited as a cause of political antagonism and excessive hatred.
Nowadays, citizens are exposed to more divisive material than ever, not just on cable TV, internet, and social media, but also in person as our social networks are more politically separated than ever. People spend more time chatting to like-minded political persons and reading like-minded news.
People tend to believe what they want to think, especially when it promotes our party’s supremacy, such information about the opposing party’s character defects.
The mixing of political identities with other identities like ethnicity or culture has reinforced partisan identification in the U.S. This has also fueled opposition-demonizing views.
Moreover, cognitive mistakes produce additional significant sources of disproportionate hate for our opponents.
Overconfidence and naïve realism—thinking our tastes are objective truths—make us assume individuals who disagree with us on anything are doing anything wrong. We exaggerate the opposing side’s terrible judgment and motivations.
“False consensus” might make us overestimate others’ support. This makes us overly cynical about opposing ideas.
Finally, planned retribution combined with human prejudices, short memory, and limited foresight can escalate antagonism.
Fixing errors
Mistakes are fixable. Hate is reversible. Much study is being done to understand and fix these problems, with amazing results.
Numerous nonprofits are seeking to unite political opponents and dispel misperceptions. Scholars and groups are trying to depolarize social media.
Despite its impossibility, America may require a bipartisan, top-down effort to reduce unnecessary animosity in the short term.
In the meanwhile, remember yourself that hate is usually partly unwarranted.
