It’s nice to be back. Apparently very few of you read our blog over the weekend (congratulations on having better things to do), so we were hardly missed!
It was a really good weekend. Sydney very nicely played spouse at a luncheon for me, and as a result he met a lot of lawyers within an hour. I should give him a quiz on all their names . . .
But then we unspoused for the rest of the day, and only met up around midnight for a big mug of tea in a Koffee Too and to swap stories. Between the two of us, I think we got our people time in for the month!
We were, admittedly, really, really tired all weekend, however. The early start Saturday morning would have been fine, except that we were running pretty low on energy all that week . . . and month. So though adrenaline helped when we were around friends, we’re glad to be home and hope to get to sleep very shortly.
Oh, and I learned some interesting things about my political views. When I was in college I was just interested in the debate aspect of my political group. I wasn’t a Poli Sci major, and I didn’t have settled views on a lot of topics. I tend to be moderate on a lot of issues, and as I wasn’t foaming at the mouth like the rest of the cohort, I felt wishy-washy. But now that I go back, just two years later, I have a much larger system of thought into which various issues fit, so I find myself developing a political persona. I still love to argue whatever position seems least well-defended at any given moment, but it’s nice to see some change in my thought since college. Why do I think that a lot of that has to do with my conversations with Sydney? We don’t always agree, but he certainly gets me thinking.
Erin
Alan Schmierer
I’m glad you had a good trip. Can you predict the winner of the 2008 election?
I’m a teeny bit embarrassed to admit I checked your blog several times over the weekend. I’m curious about your new political views too. 🙂
No ideas about the ’08 election (and the debate group is no help, since a number of them are volunteering to work for one campaign or another over the summer, so their loyalties are claimed). I am pretty sure, though, that I don’t lack an opinion because I’m being wishy-washy this time: I just hope for another option I like a little better to show up! Feel bad for the people of my home state, Iowa: the political ads start two years in advance of any presidential race, so I bet all Iowans are a bit tired of all candidates by now. Another great reason not to own a television!
I think liberal college students have gotten stupider when talking about the religious right than they used to be, and I’ve gotten more sensitive to the issue. Mostly, I suppose, I’ve gotten pricklier about talking without any real knowledge about an issue. If the students say something stupid about, say, the South, nobody in the room will stop them. But if they say something stupid about Northern liberal politics, it’s another issue. And I’m a bit tired of certain things being okay to make fun of (even in classrooms!) simply because they assume everyone is on their side. My underdog inclinations are coming out strongly, and they’re not on the side that’s being promoted by my super-liberal department! I think I’m still in the middle, but much more vocally so by now. I guess I need to go live in Tennessee so that I can feel aggravated by the other side of things for once.
And I’m frustrated by the divisiveness of every issue – it seems to send a lot of people all the way to one side or another of the argument, without any consideration for the middle. Perhaps this prickliness and the desire for middle-ground understanding is the academic coming out in me. Every issue is complicated, and politicians (and aspiring politicians) never seem to talk like it is. I’m starting to get allergic to those who make large claims, because then I assume they’re full of hot air!
Nothing surprising in these views. But I’d really rather not be reactionary and simply be rubbed the wrong way – and have that be what gets me into any particular corner! I’d rather make (gasp!) a positive position, one based on platforms and programs I actually affirm, rather than those that I simply hear yelled in my direction too often!
This is all, by the way, attributable to the fact that I went to a very politically vocal college, and I have now moved into a politically vocal profession. I would rather move back home, where people live real lives and don’t spout off about the fate of the world as much, and where they have more moderate views.
Erin
If you are sensitive to both sides, perhaps you should move to a swing state… oh, like Iowa 🙂 I am fascinated at how interested Iowans are this early in the primaries though!
Also, I think a lot of the divisiveness we feel in the US is due to the 2 party system. If one party takes a stand, the other feels they have already been defined as the opposite. There is no room for depth because our issues have to be polarized, otherwise the parties would somehow be the same, and both parties are currently in a rat race to define themsevles as being different. Immigration is one of the few issues that has had some heated, yet rounded discussion in the past years.
Not to mention that the people who then find the polarized parties rather idiotic tend to become so disgusted with politics that they stop participating, stop voting, etc. And this, of course, just leaves partisans (of the kind talked about in the psych studies last year that found that partisans’ reasoning part of the brain shuts off when listening to their favoured leaders) even more firmly in control. Everybody always talks about how low voter turnouts in the U.S. reveal widespread voter apathy. But I’m not so sure. I’m sure that some people are apathetic, but a lot of the people that I know of who don’t vote don’t vote because they can’t bring themselves to even quasi-endorse either party. So, I say, the sooner two-party systems are gotten rid of, the better.
– Sydney
I agree for the most part. I think its also unfortunate that the only viable 3rd parties in recent years have been the Green Party and Ross Perot’s party. I don’t count Ross Perot’s, because it was created for one candidate. I did find the backlash against people voting Green Party in 2000 to be very interesting, with all the talk about “wasting votes.”
I’m not holding my breath waiting for the downfall of the 2 party system. A lot of money has to go by the wayside before that will ever happen, especially with all the talk about the possibility of a $1 bil. election for 2008.
I’d be interested in reading more about the Psych study about partisan voters/supporters.
Here’s the citation for one of the studies: Westen, D., Kilts, C., Blagov, P., Harenski, K., & Hamann, S. (2006). The neural basis of motivated reasoning: An fMRI study of emotional constraints on political judgment during the U.S. Presidential election of 2004. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1947-1958. The paper can be downloaded here.
Here are a couple of popular articles that discuss it and some other research: Emory and CBS.
And here’s a partisan responding to the research.
Sydney