I have an open question for you readers of this blog. Do you think it's economic illiteracy that pushes people toward a leftist view, or does their leftist views make it impossible for them to understand how free markets work, leaving them with economic illiteracy?
We know they hate the rich and will do anything they can (including hurting the poor) in order to get to them. But if this is simply misguided economic thinking leading them to incorrect conclusions, then there is a chance they can be redeemed with education. But if, on the other hand, their economic views are a product of their devotion to the leftist ideals of envy, subjugation, and the iron fisted rule of the elite over the masses, then we might as well give up on them.
I'm just asking...
5 comments:
Rather than chicken or egg, I would call it nature or nurture. I think some people are hard-wired to be leftists, just as some people are born sociopaths.
I was raised by two leftists, but I see my rightward movement--especially on economic issues--not as a miracle, but as inevitable.
I don't think those on the left or the right really have any idea how free markets work. Seriously. I've had hundreds of conversations and debates with people ranging from far-left wingnuts to neo-conservative tea partiers and the general consensus is about 2% of the population has even a cursory understanding of economics and banking. All of the logic and reasoning in the world doesn't change their minds. In my experience, for the vast majority of the people in this country, regardless of their political ideology, their political philosophy is akin to religious dogma. They believe in it - and hold onto it as closely.
I agree with you in principle Steven but I think you might be misjudging a great many people. It's true most people don't know much about banking except bankers, but speaking specifically of Tea Party folks, no one who believes in limited government as a general principle is really 'wrong' about economics, they just might be a little ignorant of the details.
I don't really know anything about making movies, but I do know that it involves cameras, telling some kind of story, and if you want to do it for a living it needs to cost you less than it makes. Does that mean I'm illiterate in movie making... well maybe in this specific case it does yeah. But at least I have something to build on. I can continue to add levels of detail to that and while I may never be great at it, I will eventually know a great deal about it.
In the meantime, the political left believes things about economics which are not only demonstrably untrue, but that will leave you making more bad decisions than good.
Using the same example, it's like they believe that the best way to make a movie is to move to Hollywood, sleep with a bunch of actresses, and do piles of coke as often as you can. Those things may have found their way into the periphery of the movie making business, but that is NOT how it's done.
Punishing the productive, rewarding the unproductive, and expanding both the power of organized labor and the overall size of government at unprecedented rates is NOT how you get an economy to grow, but there are many on the left who believe that very thing.
Tom, I completely agree with your assessment of the economics (or lack thereof) of the Democratic party but I was thinking more in terms of the people out pulling the levers in the voting booth.
For a large percentage of the people with whom I've discussed such matters it doesn't take much digging to determine that the "why" behind many (if not most) of their voting decisions has little to no logical basis and isn't necessarily consistent with other positions. Futher, most of those who have put some thought into such things will not change their position when confronted with evidence of their error.
Those on the left are typically much worse in this regard when it comes to matters of economics. Those on the right are much more accepting in terms of economics but absolutely hit a wall when it comes to personal liberties.
Still, I don't think the fact that those on the right are more accepting of market-friendly policies can be interpreted to mean they have any more knowledge of economics than those on the left. I grew up in one of the reddest of red states, Alabama, and we were periodically forced to deal with hurricanes. As surely as night follows day, the freedom-loving, small-government people would rise up in unison to demand that the government "do something" to stop "price gouging" when the prices of gas, water, plywood, etc., began to rise. (sigh)
I don't think the average person on the right is making his/her decisions based on sound economics, I think they are voting for what they want to believe and it happens to be more free market friendly.
Just as confusing, I'm friends with a small handful of very intelligent, far-left (near socialist) people that understand my economic and logical arguments and will concede most points I offer in terms of economics - and still insist that their way is better. Its not that they don't understand, its that they don't like it. They are clearly not illiterate, yet they continuously call for economic stupidity because they place the desired political outcome above whatever economic consequences. Again, what they want to believe trumps anything else.
I realize my personal experience doesn't constitute a random sample but after spending so much time discussing things with so many different people I've concluded that economics, regardless of how much it is discussed, plays only a very small roll for most people regardless of political affiliation. They've built up a world view and an ideology from multiple, sometimes conflicting, sources and that's that - it doesn't go any deeper. The contradictions simply never register or, if they do, are dismissed.
Now, when it comes to those in positions of power things are very different and the kind of analysis I'm making above is useless. Their world is a Machiavellian-driven neverland where logic, consistency, and clear thinking do not exist - and are, in fact, discouraged. Trying to understand them as "average" people is useless.
Could economic education help? Certainly, but it isn't going to happen on a large scale any time soon. The people in power benefit from 1) the people being largely malleable and easily swayed by rhetoric and demagoguery and 2) the Keynesian hooey that is taught as economics.
Tom, I completely agree with your assessment of the economics (or lack thereof) of the Democratic party but I was thinking more in terms of the people out pulling the levers in the voting booth.
For a large percentage of the people with whom I've discussed such matters it doesn't take much digging to determine that the "why" behind many (if not most) of their voting decisions has little to no logical basis and isn't necessarily consistent with other positions. Futher, most of those who have put some thought into such things will not change their position when confronted with evidence of their error.
Those on the left are typically much worse in this regard when it comes to matters of economics. Those on the right are much more accepting in terms of economics but absolutely hit a wall when it comes to personal liberties.
Still, I don't think the fact that those on the right are more accepting of market-friendly policies can be interpreted to mean they have any more knowledge of economics than those on the left. I grew up in one of the reddest of red states, Alabama, and we were periodically forced to deal with hurricanes. As surely as night follows day, the freedom-loving, small-government people would rise up in unison to demand that the government "do something" to stop "price gouging" when the prices of gas, water, plywood, etc., began to rise. (sigh)
I don't think the average person on the right is making his/her decisions based on sound economics, I think they are voting for what they want to believe and it happens to be more free market friendly.
Just as confusing, I'm friends with a small handful of very intelligent, far-left (near socialist) people that understand my economic and logical arguments and will concede most points I offer in terms of economics - and still insist that their way is better. Its not that they don't understand, its that they don't like it. They are clearly not illiterate, yet they continuously call for economic stupidity because they place the desired political outcome above whatever economic consequences. Again, what they want to believe trumps anything else.
I realize my personal experience doesn't constitute a random sample but after spending so much time discussing things with so many different people I've concluded that economics, regardless of how much it is discussed, plays only a very small roll for most people regardless of political affiliation. They've built up a world view and an ideology from multiple, sometimes conflicting, sources and that's that - it doesn't go any deeper. The contradictions simply never register or, if they do, are dismissed.
Now, when it comes to those in positions of power things are very different and the kind of analysis I'm making above is useless. Their world is a Machiavellian-driven neverland where logic, consistency, and clear thinking do not exist - and are, in fact, discouraged. Trying to understand them as "average" people is useless.
Could economic education help? Certainly, but it isn't going to happen on a large scale any time soon. The people in power benefit from 1) the people being largely malleable and easily swayed by rhetoric and demagoguery and 2) the Keynesian hooey that is taught as economics.
Post a Comment