What is it about politics that makes people go insane?
 

There is nothing else like it. No other subject of conversation that gets people riled up like a discussion of politics. I'm not a political nut myself. In fact I hate talking politics, and I'm not well educated on politics. But I listen to talk radio so politics occasionally come up. Usually when discussiing certain issues like sports, music, even games, people cordially disagree and make their points. But when it comes to politics and someone disagrees with someone, the first response is always "dude, you don't have a clue about politics." Everyone thinks they know everything when it comes to politics.

Why do political discussions get so crazy and so heated? I understand that when people feel passionate about something, things can get out of hand, but people feel passionate about sports too, and those conversations rarely get out of control. It's only politics where in 5 minutes people can almost come to blows over a simple debate. It snowballs unlike any topic of discussion I've ever seen. It can't just be the passion involved. There are plenty of things to discuss that people are passionate for, but they hardly get out of control.

What the heck is it about politics that everyone thinks they know everything and that makes everyone get all crazy and angry? Someone please explain it to me, because I've never felt that way about politics. I rarely discuss them, but when I do I never lose my cool.

I duno about anyone else, but at least two of the English Local election seats were decided by drawing lots...
You frikin' herd me, Lots.

If that doesn't make anyone go insane, I don't know what will.

Nationalism and ideology make's any political issue a very touchy one.

Ideology being a person's particular view on morals/beliefs. This ties in closely with religion. People don't like having their beliefs or preception of reality challenged. Why? The short answer is because they're shallow. Everybody is to a certain extent. If you deny this, you're pretty much proving that you lack any self-reflective depth. The long answer is it upsets their own little world where they are the central figure. While throwing into question everything they know, but more importantly everything they think they know.

Nationalism is something that I'd define as overactive pride in one's country/state. It's a self-absorbed notion that "our" country is better then everyone elses. Everybody has heard the phrase "God bless America". If this isn't a sign or overactive pride or arrogance I don't know what is.

Both of these are a derivative issue of moral relativity, and how each seperated group/culture/civilization(s) view their way as "the right way", and so everyone else by default is/are doing something wrong. The bottom line is that I believe that human beings are selfish and self-absorbed. Thus, so are nation-states in their domestic/foreign policies.

There are certain American specific examples I could name; The vilification of the political opposition, and how most Americans view their opposition as the harbinger of doom for their particular way of life. But I wanted to speak as general as possible, and not trash Republicans/Democrats by specifically bringing up issues. Plus, I do enough of that as it is.

But Watts, don't you see that your mere definition of terms in describing politics can lead to untold amounts of debate? don't sound so sure of yourself.
Actually, nationalism is more or less defined by poltiics textbooks and courses as a sort of sense of belonging with a group of other individuals who share common traits such as language, culture, philosophy, religion, ehtnicity, race, et cetera and who wish to have some sort of self-determination. A nation does not neccsarily identify with a state, as you have pointed out, as a state is mostly the "machinery of government", a legal and physical entity. A state has defined borders, government, sovreignty and the ability to negotatiate with other states. These two seperate human endeavors have a multiplicity of unique relationships: you can have a nation-state, multinational state, multi-state nation, state-nation and now the theoretical emergence of a market state!

The truth is that unlike sports, music or other topicsof interest, politics determines more than anyhting and has more impact on real life. Politics manages everything from hospitals to roads to schools to the military. Don'tconfuse politcs with government...politics can be very loosely defined as the study of interactions between individuals. It is these interaction which define our lives and how welive them, therefore, the subject is very touchy.

Sure, I don't have a problem with that though. It just leads to the possibility of more people sounding off with their opinions and ideas. The only problem I can see then is the slight problem that this might lead to long and drawn out debate which exposes flaws in my thinking.

Clarifying the matter though, I was not defining politics. That would take much more brainpower then I think I'm capable of. I was just listing two major issues on how/why politics get's nasty. As for sounding sure of myself, my ideas work for me. Nobody else really has to buy into them to make them work. They're valid to meeee, so that's enough. I drink the 'kool aid' of my own making.

The original poster is looking for reasons why/how politics can get so nasty. Not textbook definitions. Nationalism has been manipulated throughout the ages for political causes and means. Usually through expansionary war. I think that's the absolute height of politics becoming nasty or even insane. War is either rational to it's deadliest peak, or irrational by human nature. Depends on what you think/believe about human nature.

As for reinforcing my point on ideology you didn't try to dispute... well there's a reason why there's rules why we can't have debates about issues like gay marriage. They hardly end up civilized, and they do challenge everyone's so called "conventional wisdom". Diversity is always a threat to that.
Or a State of Anarchy, of Revolution, or of Civil War. Back to the topic.
You don't think the moral crusades against rock'n'roll, comic books, video games, "pornographic television" that were political by nature wern't the least bit irrational? Whether in their logic or persecution of action? Is Satan really trying to convert me through rock'n'roll?!

Furthermore you don't think said "areas of interests" had any effect on anybody's 'real' life? Or had massive amounts of influence in politics? I'm going to disagree with you there. Completely. Music, theater, and literature have always been of extreme importance and influence in politics. Despite it's varying message. If you believe that politics is the interaction of individuals governing everyday life, then these areas of interests for individuals do not outweigh each other in my mind.

Explaining that politics is a touchy issue does not fully begin to explain why people become so enthralled or even crazy over politics. It certainly doesn't explain why people kill each other over it. You don't kill somebody over a issue you consider "touchy". Plenty of people throughout history have killed and died over issues of ideology and nationalism. Probably isn't going to change anytime soon.

I'd disagree that there's no other issue like politics: religion? It's probably even worse. :P And on that note, I'm not so sure with politics that it's so much about nationality (although I certainly believe it's a part, people want to feel *they're* the most supportive of their country), because religion, a similarly heated issue, transcends even national boundaries. I would say these issues are the closest things to a person's identity short of debating whether a person himself is good/bad. Sports teams, etc, just don't have the same weight, because you probably don't invest your "self" into those things. But many people do invest their "self" into politics and religion, some to the point that these issues seem to act as extensions of their personalities, so when those come under attack, those people see themselves and their value systems as under attack and get riled up in no time.

But I see those people as short sighted, 'cause letting politics and religion essentially merge with one's identity isn't something I see as a preferable course of action, quite frankly. I'd call it a sign of maturity to be able to be detached enough from these things to keep cool when such debates arise and keep it in perspective that your beliefs aren't you. When those two merge to a high degree is where you get people willing to blow themselves up over Allah, or Ideology XYZ.

I find it curious how some people have so much hatred towrds certain political figures. Clinton and Bush come to mind. Yet these people don't know anyone at Guantanamo, haven't had evil government agents swoop down on them in the library and confiscate their books, haven't been personally affected by Bush in anyway, yet they hate him with an unbridled passion. Same for some of those on the right..it was like Clinton was getting bj's from their girlfriend or something. Jeez people, live your lives..realize that politicians have a very limited influence on you personally, and get over it.

I too would like to know why people get worked up as much as they do about politics. I admit sometimes I get drawn in a little myself. But I guess some it lies in the fact that we don't like having our ideals, morals and beliefs being questioned. Other times I think its just that some people simply can't see things from another angle.

There's religion.

Anyway, the reason is why most people feel that everyone else, really deep down, believe in roughly the same stuff they do. Okay, so you want to help poor people, that's cool, so do I, but you can't honestly believe we should give them extra opportunities we did not have ourselves, do you?

It's territorialism.

C'mon Wesker, you know you'd miss it if it was gone. Shows like South Park thrive and prosper off that kind of political controversy. It'd be a sad day for television and entertainment if that ever went away.

Would you rather just have one corporate party instead of a loudly bickering pair of corporate political parties? Seems so boring. Like being communist or something. At least we can be amused and outraged by 'gun rights', immigration, gay rights, and other social issues that are used to differiciante the otherwise same bland party.

Maybe progressive liberals are just gluttons for punishment.

"Our government is corrupt and inefficient."
"YEAH!"
"Let's organize and protest!"
"YEAAAAAH!!!"

......later.

"They ignored us...."
":("
"Next time they'll surely pay attention!"
"Yay!"

Heh. The political left is still a huge source of amusement.

What's so heated about politic? It's all about interest and how you would reach them in systematic way. That's one the most exciting point of politic.
Well I'm studying international relations. Politic is fun.

I always laugh hard when politicans correcting their statements or denied a such news and stating like "We have no clue about that", "You got it totally wrong", "We didn't mean such thing" etc.

In many classes I've taken the base question about why people differ in world views comes down to their view of human nature. Are humans inherently good, or inherently evil? For most people this jump off point leads them to a series of conclusions that become the basis for how they conduct themselves and how they view the world around them. Whenever somebody is critical of another's core belief structure, it's easy for them to get emotionally charged. After being challenged frequently enough, a person will become jaded and is less distrubed by "cognitive dissonance." Best to emotionally remove yourself and realize that the person you're arguing with has the best of intentions based on their basic world view. However this is easier said than done. Gotta love 100 level polysci courses with all the kiddies raging at each other.

My idea of why politics in general, whether you're discussing relgion or science in that context, creates such bizarre behavior from people is two-part:

1. Emotional investment is a rather big deal today, and people are more willing to put much of themselves into the ideas they espouse (e.g. the religious right, gay activists) which leads into some passionate debating when their beliefs are questioned because that in turn means their self worth is questioned as well. If a more detached perspective and better distinction between personal and political were practiced, then we'd be seeing a little less hotheadedness in politics. That won't happen anytime soon when "the personal is the political" is the prime political philosophy.

2. The personal need to be right, to be infallible. People really do not want to be wrong, which as stated in the previous point, leads them to question themselves in a manner they find uncomfortable. They prefer to be in a state where their core assumptions are unquestioned and therefore lead a comfortable existence. When they are questioned, they become very adamant to defend their beliefs in hoping to simply shut up the doubt. This need to be right has to be suppressed in order to allow the mind to develop and grow as ideas become more complex with the introduction of new information.

I think a good deal of it is that they might be affected by it. Nobody likes taxes.

We made not be having an acedemic debate heere, however, clarifying terms and having rational arguments to beack your use of terminology contributes to the discussion.

You're using a different sense of the word.


What I'm pointing out is that everything is the product of human interaction, therefore, politics is onvolved in absolutely everything in a person's life. I don't particularly see your "crusade" point. The so called "moral crusades" against certain cultural products really had very little to do with the items themselves and far more to do with....politics.


For someone who decries nationalism, is it rather odd that you focus on America in a more global discussion of politics. What about that large orange protest in Kyiv, hmm?

The communists do!

politics..
 

..unless the discussion is about futbol, leading to the occasional riot disguised as a good time.. regarding politics, religion & the like ~ many have their ideals & some even cherish them in high regard as being the correct one; of course, when debates occur - beliefs are challenged & sometimes threatened leading to the aftermath of self-preservation of personal pride..

I was only giving definition to those terms under the parameters of the subject. I still haven't heard or seen much to contradict my view. Especially with the tensions between Chavez-US, and the Iranian-UN-Nuclear issue. Nationalism is playing a huge role. They're particular nasty issues on a State level.

Point is noted, that example was just an attempt to get you to answer why you think politics get people so entralled. Instead of focusing on trying to undermind my own explainations. I can't have that. I'm a shallow person. :)

I'm not decrying nationalism. You have me all wrong. I'm just focusing on a particularly negative point of view which is relative to my prespective.

What make's you think I'm only focusing on America? I'll be more clear. Only the Bolivians in recent memory have demonstrated the political will necessary to virtually shut down their country to get what they want. There's very few exceptions to the rule.

The Ukrainian election protests don't really count as a good example. Both sides (whether pro-european, or pro-russian) had enough support from their respective international blocs to launch protests if their side didn't win. The protesters themselves were pawns. Who do you really think had more influence? The cadres of European nations, or a couple thousand protesters? Furthermore, do you really think those so-called progressives were singing the same tune when Russia turned off the tap to their natural gas supplies after their subsidies were abolished? I doubt it. But this is off on a completely different tangent to the subject matter.

Not unlike the political right, with their anti-abortion, anti-gay, prayer in schools protests, right?

What gets me is the constant stereotyping and labeling that goes on in the political circus. Spin-doctoring contributes heavily to this, as it's all about shaping people's perceptions, usually in a negative and/or exclusivist way.

Who said communists love taxes? There's no such thing as tax, in a communist government, it'd be self-defeating. All of your income comes from the government, everyone gets paid the same and has the same access to the same number of assets.

Ok, how bout those transitioning to Communism do.

and, fascists do too.

I stopped finding the political right amusing the moment I realized they were serious about wanting armageddon to come about.

Have a question for you though; Has the status quo changed on any of those issues? From where I'm sittin' they haven't. They just get stirred up every now and then for political means. Politicians are great at ignoring people and using their ideology against them for political ends. That's why it's just easier to be amused by politicians and politics at large instead of letting myself be stirred up by it. I'm a happier person that way.

However, by having ambiguity of terms, your argument is weakend. Just making sure everyone's on the same level here.

The protests were organized in Ukraine by Ukrainians, and the protests were near-spontaneous.

Who do you think had more power in Moscow when the Cold War ended...a few portestors or the military and economic might of the Soviet state?

Which is exactly my point.

Bush was re-elected because he used homophobia as his platform. He got people behind him by catering to a bullshit social issue.

"I thought the 2004 campaign was about how to defend our country and improve security, but apparently it was a referendum on boys kissing. Somehow, I must've missed that memo."

Are you SURE? I think you haven't seen yet a OpenSource™ flame war... it's scary to say the least!

And it's often political.