In much the same way that your religion is chosen for you by your country of origin, family and environment. So too are the way political allegiances are formed.
I grew up in a relatively poor, working class, part of North London. So in 1979, when Magaret Thatcher became the first female Prime Minister in history. I along with everyone I knew, got on with the quiet business of hating her.
My friends hated her, their parents hated her, my teachers hated her, my mother hated her. So I hated her, simple; there was never any question of me doing anything else.
The next naturally progressive thing to do with all this negative emotion directed at one person, was to become a Labour supporter. Therefore, from an age when I didn't really understand what democracy, elections, or even a Prime Minister were. From boy to man, I became a staunch Labour supporter, and was proud of it.
Standing For Nothing And Believing In Everything
image source
After a recent Chinese meal, I was reminded by a fortune cookie, of that asinine saying;
"If you don't stand for something, you'll believe in anything."
This rhetoric has been abused by religious and political zealots throughout the ages. However now it seems, the saying is back in possession of the political classes.
I remember in the lead up to Gulf War II (Clone Of The Attack), Tony Blair intoned, and George Bush came right out and said;
"Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists"
Of course the two statements simply bear witness to the fact that human beings will favour one group over another for no particular good reason, (just ask any team sports fan) and there are people out there, who will take advantage of that.
There have been countless studies done on the subject, and whether it is blue eyed people discriminating against brown eyed people. Or people given arbritrary, random even numbers, learning to hate a group bearing randomly assigned, odd numbers. We know that the evolutionary instinct to group together and mistrust anybody outside of the group, is something that is unavoidable.
Or is it?
Afterall...
We are human aren't we?
The Human Dilemma
imagesource
One of the many things that make us uniquely human; what sets us apart from every species that is, or ever was. Is the ability to contemplate the evolutionary process that brought us into being, and at once manipulate that very process.
Clearly the nexus of this manipulation is via medical science; from the pacemaker to the erradication of smallpox, we have fought back against the seemingly impossible odds of evolutionary biology.
However it is not just the reserve of the intellectual elite among us to change the direction of human progression. Exciting social metamorphosis, is also within the powers of the individual.
Clearly the desire to group together and to protect the group in deed and action, at the cost of all other groups, is a naturally selected trait. Either that, or God just really enjoys wars. It makes complete sense that any social species who did not have a grouping bias, would not last as long as a competing species that did.
The fact that we are human, simply allows us to express group favouritism on a more fantastical and stupid level than any other being is capable of.
But that's the point, we are human, we can recognise when behaviour in us belongs to an evolutionary past, and we can choose to fight against it.
A perfect example of how we fight against group bias is racisim. Being racist is a form of group bias, and I'm talking about overt racism here.
If you openly do not like one race, purely based on the fact that they are that race. Then that is a form of group bias, and one may even (controversially) argue, that racism, is not only natural, but to be expected.
However we defy that "natural" instinct to the point we reteach ourselves, on an individual and societal level. Without this social evolution, human society would be difficult, it is the pace of our social development which represents our ultimate salvation.
However, in the midst or our social development, we have politics, and politicians. The prominent ones, who seek to control states and countries, are only too aware, what to say and do, to stoke up old instinctive feelings.
These men and women, use polarizing language, creating a them and us scenario, presenting each listener with a clear and simple message: "We're right, and they're wrong."
So now we have political group bias, combined with. the overwhelming feeling of being right; a very heady combination indeed.
However the problem with most of the population being right all the time; despite having conflicting views, is it makes it damn near impossible to win an argument, or even to get someone to see your point of view for a few seconds. If this wasn't the case, we would probably see new candidates popping up, and wild swings in opinion from one election to the next, in democracy across the globe.
The Power Of Wrong
Recently I discovered a very powerful secret, I discovered that if you tell the person your arguing with that you're prepared to be wrong; the argument turns into a discussion. This is because you're telling them what they already know, that there's a chance you're wrong. Simply by admitting this small fact, makes a huge difference. It goes a little something like this:
"OK, show me this proof you talk of on Google I'm prepared to be wrong, if I see that, then I shall admit that I am wrong, and you are right".
That's a real showstopper right there! Because of course, that is a double edged statement, because if they can't prove you wrong when you ask them to, then there's a good chance that it is they and not you who are wrong. The key is to be prepared for either outcome, being wrong isn't so bad, in fact it can be a great tool for growth, something that you'll come to yearn.
You see, I used to confuse the words;
"I may not agree with you, but I will defend your right to say it"
With
"I may not agree with you fundamentally, yet I will remain open to the possibility that I'm wrong about some things"
The difference between the two statements is as subtle as it is stark. For a long time I felt that defending someone's right to say something, was enough. But it isn't, just because you recognise the right of someone else to hold opposing views to you, doesn't make you truly open-minded. Because by doing that you are essentially saying;
*"I still think you're an asshole, but I'll defend your right to be one.
Doesn't sound so great when you put it like that; does it?
Catharsis
image source
Once you embrace the possibility that you're wrong some of the time, a process of catharsis takes place. It becomes impossible to seriously hold onto any political allegiances, of course your core beliefs remain. However they are much more open to inspection, using the power of being wrong, you can examine a previously held conviction, and realise you may have been wrong to hold it.
The power of being wrong is so powerful, that it can perhaps be convincingly argued, that it is a major driving force of social evolution. There will always be trenchant views, held by people who simply will never let those views go; however as long as there are enough of us who are prepared to be wrong, society can move on.
So perhaps that then this is the only hope for democracy, is if we all drop our political allegiances, and examine each belief we hold; without the lens of politically-charged, group bias.
The shedding of political allegiances, goes hand in hand with coming to terms with your own fallacy. Now I can listen to a person of any political or religious persuasion and truly engage with what they are saying.
Without the shackles of knowing I am right, and that anyone who deviates to far away from my beliefs, is wrong. You can truly ascertain what is going on in your immediate vicinity, and in the world at large.
Once you truly embrace chance of being wrong, things will make more sense to you. You will start to see things differently from when you were right all the time. After a time spent in this glorious state of wrong, your personal catharsis can take place.
At that point you will realise, you're not left-wing, you're not right-wing, you're not even a centerist; you're the whole damn bird.
Yours In Eternal Wrongness
Cryptogee