This Explains The Tea Party v 2.0
Have you ever wondered how an entire group of people, when faced with the facts and evidence of a failed ideology will continue to head down that road? Or how people will continue to defend adisastrouspolicy even though there is nothing good that can come from it?
Apparently, there is a scientific reason for this.
Its one of the great assumptions underlying modern democracy that an informed citizenry is preferable to an uninformed one. Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government, Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1789. This notion, carried down through the years, underlies everything from humble political pamphlets to presidential debates to the very notion of a free press. Mankind may be crooked timber, as Kant put it, uniquely susceptible to ignorance and misinformation, but its an article of faith that knowledge is the best remedy. If people are furnished with the facts, they will be clearer thinkers and better citizens. If they are ignorant, facts will enlighten them. If they are mistaken, facts will set them straight.
In the end, truth will out. Wont it?
Maybe not. Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. Its this: Facts dont necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
This explains a lot about not only the Tea Party folks, but people all over the political spectrum. No matter where we sit on that spectrum, we are loath to budge — even when confronted with overwhelming evidence against our position. Instead, we will formulate new paths to get to where we think our position SHOULD be, even if it means taking the most circuitous route to get there.
It explains how the Jewishholocaustdoesn’t exist for some people, or how there never was a “race problem” until the Civil Rights acts were put in place or how racism only exists in black people. It also explains how a Majority in Congress forgets about the people who made that happen, or a President who was put in place to make some big changes, continues down the same old road as hispredecessors.