Slashdot Mirror
Both Parties Ignore the Facts
An anonymous reader writes "Any democrat will tell you the republicans ignore the facts. Any republican will tell you the democrats ignore the facts. Turns out they're right. A new study monitored brain activity of partisans; they shun logic and use emotional processing centers to justify their candidate's contradictory statements. 'With their minds made up, brain activity ceased in the areas that deal with negative emotions such as disgust. But activity spiked in the circuits involved in reward, a response similar to what addicts experience when they get a fix.'"
The definition of authoritarian is, at its most basic, one who ignores the facts. History repeatedly shows that the more government tries to get involved, the worse things get. Even in US history we see how politicians have led to death, poverty and addictions. When alcohol was illegal, the mob became the new provider. When cocaine was made illegal, the gangs created crack and cocaine blends for what used to be a positive medicinal product (ask any european dentist).
I have to call shens on this article though. I see a few problems:
A new study monitored brain activity of partisans
Since when do supporters of either party have brains?
they shun logic and use emotional processing centers to justify their candidate's contradictory statements.
Emotions? Taking hard earned wealth from people you don't know with the threat of a gun or jail is not what I consider emotionally-stable or even emotionally-available. Supporting either party offers just that -- free money by forcing others to part with it against their will.
Be Democrat locally. Be Republican locally. Join communities that accept your views and were you can truly vote with your feet if you disagree -- maybe moving a few miles. When you bring your authoritarian mandates to the federal government, you force your will on people who don't accept your authority. Even though I am an anarcho-capitalist, I do see value in the Constitution. Uphold it, stop worrying about the rest of the country or the rest of the world or even the rest of your state. Focus on your community and not only will these studies not matter, but there won't be any facts to ignore as long as you're living with those you agree with.
You are confusing your response to faith with your rabid Godless hippie behaviour. The difference is that your brain is suffering from all the methane your metabolizing when your head is up your ass.
Who are you?
and what have you done with my brain?
signed, GWB.
if I claimed I was emperor just because some watery tart lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!
Republicans have brain activity? I don't think so.
... and then they built the supercollider.
So Fox News acts like a drug to the right-wingers. Crafty way to get ratings.
He truly beleave that he's the choosen one.
"Insanity in individuals is something rare, but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule." - Nietzsche
So it is perfectly legit to call President Bush a cracked out junkie drunk with power constanly looking for his next high?
Thank you science.
When Reagan shot down this law, he paved the way for the new breed of media we see now, where editorial is intermixed with journalism
I think this has always been the case. Were you going to argue that journalists were some special breed of human which is magically incapable of bias? Whether or not this bias in "reporting" has become more egregious is another discussion, and one where you and I will likely agree.
and we have 24-hour propaganda networks and extremist talk radio.
That's a rather unfair statement for you to make given the site you linked to. It is blatant and shameless left-wing propaganda. For example, from the article:
"Even the president jumps on the bandwagon with statements like, 'You're either with us or you're with the terrorists.'" (Okay, accuses the president of black-and-white thinking.) "Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and thousands of other partisian pundits were free to spew their slanted take on the world" (And there's some black-and-white thinking by the author himself -- Politically, Bill O'Reilly is quite different from Michael Savage, but if you're not adequately "progressive" then you're a FASCIST NAZI!)
"Liberals, representing the moderate voice of the mainstream" (Only Liberals are in the mainstream!)
"didn't have the resources that mouthpieces for big-pharma, insurance, finance, oil and defense contractors, and as a result, found themselves literally drowning in a sea of pro-big-business propaganda," (All corporations, business, and capitalism is of the Devil!)
"So now you have pundits-o-plenty on the airwaves, representing the agenda of the richest corporate benefactors." (Only the right-wing represents the interests of the Evil Rich!)
And now we get to the core disagreement in our philosophy. You write:
The mainstream media must be forced to revert back to responsible journalism
Absolutely not, and shame on you for suggesting such a repugnant, unconstitutional, anti-American notion! No one should be FORCED to say anything! The "Fairness" Doctrine is a direct violation of the First Amendment which guarantees I am free to say (and NOT to say) anything that I wish. I believe that you view "responsible journalism" as something that only the Left can provide, and if the audience doesn't want it, then you aren't afraid to use the deadly FORCE of government to make it happen. I really am disgusted by Christian, right-wing zealots who wish to make my life a living hell, but you outclass them in villany when you start talking about FORCING people to say what you want to hear, particularly since I think socialism sucks at least as badly as evangelical Christianity does.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.