Replies to post #480634 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[12yearplan]

Little deeper than that B4.. please listen and learn how to combat those undesirable instincts..
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/our-tribal-future-david-r-samson-1.7237823

Ideas53:59Political tribalism is an existential threat to humanity: evolutionary anthropologist


Tribalism was a driving force behind the evolution of homo sapiens and our civilization.

But it's a mismatch — even maladaptive — for the world we live in today. That's according to David R. Samson, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of Toronto, who holds that our instinct for tribalism — or what he calls 'Tribe Drive' — is one of our most powerful pieces of cognitive machinery.

It's made people identify with their groups so strongly that they'll believe untruths — even far-fetched conspiracy theories — over any reality that conflicts with the values of their tribe.

"It happens unconsciously, and in fact it doesn't work if it's not unconscious. So one of its adaptive properties is the fact that you don't have any control over it," Samson told IDEAS host Nahlah Ayed.

Samson is the author of Our Tribal Future: How to Channel our Foundational Human Instincts into a Force for Good, which won the 2023 Balsillie Prize for Public Policy.

Samson joined Nahlah Ayed to discuss his book and explain how tribalism in politics is an increasingly serious threat.

Here is an excerpt from their conversation.

How vulnerable [are we] to people who know how to use tribal signaling, for their own purposes, whether they're religious leaders or political leaders? How vulnerable does all this make us?

The best counter to being manipulated by your instinct is to understand it. But we're just gaining an understanding of it. And, it's true. It is … likely being manipulated en masse and to a very dangerous effect.

The United States is such a great example because they're unlike Canada — there are just two parties. So it's very binary in that political tribal domain. And they're in a particular state right now where anthropologically I think something like endogamy is going on — when one tribe forbids intermarriage, and trade with another tribe means only us.

I mean this has been happening since tribes existed, right? Depending on your status of in-group and outgroup. What's going on right now in the U.S. is, I think, something akin to endogamy, where you only see intermarriage now between Democrats and Republicans, and it's at 4 per cent.

When you look at the things, too, that predict a successful marriage, political orientation is more predictive than certain personality traits and educational background.

Seriously?

I'm not kidding. I can't make this stuff up.

In the 80s on up, you start to see a separation of the pools up to the point where, when I see it now in 2024, they are so distinct. I like to think of it like I'm an evolutionary biologist by trade. And that to me looks like a speciation event. Like two populations are no longer intermingling. If you just add time, that means you get not only different tribes, you get different people. Different organisms, if you're just looking at it from a population genetics level.
Author David R. Samson and his book, Our Tribal Future
The tribe drive is an instinct that evolved into creating coalitions, belonging and trust. But it has also devolved into intolerance, violence and even genocide, says winner of the 2023 Balsillie Prize for Public Policy David. R Samson. (MacMillan Publishers/ Blake Eligh )

Do you have a sense that charismatic leaders of political or religious movements have an instinctive gift for sending the right messages, to deploy these signals on people who crave connection and belonging at a time when we are all living our own lives?

Oh, absolutely. It's a playbook really that's been used probably for 300,000 years. But when you have things like the internet and the scale at which the signals can be distributed at ease, those with an instinctual gift are given essentially these power tools to amplify their capacity, to create coalitionary alliances.

Oftentimes, it's done at the expense of defining a very clear outgroup, what somebody is not. And so that is a very powerful effect.

Not to point fingers at one particular camp, but I am curious how much you think Donald Trump's polarizing effect — the fierce loyalty of his base and the repulsion of his opponents — how much would you put down to tribalism?

With Donald Trump, it's almost low-hanging fruit. I'll say this: the New Apostolic Reformation churches — their leaders … believe they have a direct line of communication with God. Trump has done a very effective job at signaling to those groups. And they are very good at mobilizing at the grassroots, which I think is to a certain extent one of the reasons why you have such success with Donald Trump in signaling to those groups.

But that being said, the more and more I study this, the more and more I look at myself in the mirror and say, 'how valuable is it actually to identify as one of these political groups?' Because the playbook is being used at scale by everyone.

How much of a threat do you think political tribalism is?

It's the greatest threat of our species in the 21st century. It's something we have to figure out.



Listen to the full conversation by downloading the IDEAS podcast from your favourite app.

[fuagf]

B402, You say what you say,

Co pilot smacked ya pretty good on outsourcing......Which leads back to the credibility gap you and dems now have created......You'll lie cheat and ignore the obvious all in the name of politics.... And continue down the path that lead us where we are today.....Great job of creating problems and compounding them and at the same time becoming out of touch and getting weird to boot........
P - Welcome to the world you created......Now clutch your pearls and be as clever as you can insulting people,,,Dems sure don't know how to govern,
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174622416

You didn't say the dems had created their own credibility gap. That would have been a totally different meaning than the one you conveyed. You said "the credibility gap" which to any reader would have to mean the credibility gap in America. Your side is the side that nurtures and feeds off mistrust.

We all know which party lies and cheats more. You know too, that's why when you blame Dems for creating a credibility gap you are lying.

Then you deny what you said.

" political commentator find me a nonpartisan commentator first
P - I didn't say dems had the biggest credibility gap, those are your words, mine is dems have a credibility gap due to their own partisanship....
P - Difference of opinion, and I would say you are silly and insolent to think dems don't.....And it showed in your accusation of me saying dems had the biggest.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174622416

Then you lie about what the other, me in this case, said. Too bad you didn't say what you meant to say in the first place.

[janice shell]

mine is dems have a credibility gap due to their own partisanship....

They're a POLITICAL PARTY, for God's sake. Of course they're partisan. What might be hoped for from both parties is the occasional attempt at bipartisanship.

I think it's clear that it's the Republicans who're more likely to fail to play along. How many bills has this Congress passed? Hardly any.