The Left Flashcards
Think Republicans are disconnected from reality? It’s even worse among liberals - The Guardian; 2019
Main Idea:
Americans, especially those highly educated and politically engaged, often misunderstand the beliefs of the other political side—and this misunderstanding contributes to greater division.
Key Findings from the Survey:
Democrats underestimated Republicans: Only guessed 50% think racism is still a problem, but 79% actually do.
Republicans overestimated Democrats: Thought 50% believe most police are bad people, but only 15% actually do.
More education = less accuracy, especially among Democrats. In fact, Democrats without a high school diploma were more accurate in their guesses about Republicans than those with postgraduate degrees.
Political engagement increases misperception, not clarity.
Why This Happens:
“Bubble-ism”: Highly educated Democrats tend to live in homogenous liberal environments, limiting exposure to other views.
Ironically, though liberals value diversity, they may experience less political diversity in their everyday lives.
This isolation is intensified by recent Democratic losses (e.g., presidency, courts), leading to grief, retreat, and a desire for safety in familiar circles.
Consequences:
The left’s retreat from engagement can lead to misjudgment, marginalization, and strategic weakness.
Effective change requires understanding the other side—not demonizing them from a distance.
Hope for Common Ground:
Despite deep divisions, there are shared values and cross-party cooperation, such as:
Climate action (both parties show surprising support in polls).
Joint efforts like the After Charlottesville Project.
Bipartisan legislation, e.g., criminal justice reform, lobbying restrictions (e.g., AOC and Ted Cruz teaming up).
Mutual respect: Even conservative Trump supporters may admire someone like Bernie Sanders for his integrity.
Survey Misperceptions (from More in Common’s “Hidden Tribes” project):
❓ Q: How many Republicans believe that racism is still a problem in America today?
Democrats guessed: 50%
Actual percentage of Republicans who agreed: 79%
❓ Q: How many Democrats believe that “most police are bad people”?
Republicans guessed: 50%
Actual percentage of Democrats who agreed: 15%
Additional Polling (from Yale, Stanford, Monmouth):
❓ Should the U.S. set strict CO₂ emission limits on existing coal-fired power plants (even if it increases electricity costs)?
Democrats: 87% yes
Republicans: 56% yes
❓ Should the U.S. participate in the Paris Climate Accord, reducing emissions regardless of what other countries do?
Majority in both parties: Yes
(Exact numbers not given, but confirmed majorities)
Final Message:
Major political change requires bridging divides, listening carefully, and finding common ground. The Democratic Party—and America more broadly—needs to reengage, not retreat, and see the other side clearly, not caricature it.
A reality check for the progressive left - The Hill; 2023
Key Points from the Article
Author’s Background:
Retired FBI agent with nearly 28 years of experience, mostly in financial crimes (e.g., fraud, money laundering, Ponzi schemes).
Core Observation:
People interpret reality through their own personal lens, shaped by upbringing, bias, and life experience.
Behavior Patterns in Financial Crimes:
Criminals often deny or justify their wrongdoing.
Victims sometimes refuse to admit they were conned — even blaming the FBI for interfering.
Maxim #1 – “People believe what they want to believe.”
Rooted in confirmation bias: people seek out or interpret info that confirms their beliefs.
Maxim #2 – “People want simple answers to complicated questions.”
Many adopt rigid belief systems to avoid the discomfort of constant critical thinking.
Emotional Comfort Over Truth:
Simplicity and ideological certainty offer emotional safety, but limit understanding and self-growth.
Application to Politics:
These human tendencies aren’t limited to crime—they also apply to today’s political divide.
Critique of the Progressive Left:
Progressive left (per Pew: 6% of Americans) is often very liberal, highly educated, mostly white.
Tends to enforce its views with moral certainty and rejects opposing views as “evil” or “disinformation.”
Displays intolerance for nuance and anger when challenged.
Psychological Impact on the Left:
Poll: Liberals aged 18–55 are 15% less likely to be satisfied with their lives than conservatives.
Progressive frustration may stem from lack of broad societal acceptance of their worldview.
Far-Right Extremism Also Criticized:
Examples: Election denial, QAnon, “Great Replacement” theory.
FBI has warned about the potential for violence from far-right groups.
Common Thread on Both Sides:
Rigid ideology, confirmation bias, and rejection of alternative views are present across the political spectrum.
Danger of Self-Created Realities:
People construct their own version of reality, and when it’s challenged, they often respond with rage, denial, or cancelation.
Emotionally Secure People Can Handle Disagreement:
Confident people don’t feel threatened by other views; they don’t need to dehumanize opponents.
Progressives May Struggle to Defend Ideas Not Grounded in Reality:
Example criticized: “Men can get pregnant” — seen as disconnected from objective truth.
Inevitable Collision With Reality:
Like criminals who deny guilt, ideologues will eventually face objective truth.
Clinging to false or overly simplistic beliefs cannot withstand long-term scrutiny.
Final Reflection:
Lasting understanding and progress require openness, humility, and willingness to challenge one’s own views.
Why don’t liberals believe in facts and logic? - Quora Comments
- Would this question be suggesting that liberals (whatever that word might mean) doubt whether of not facts exist, whether or not logic exists?
If so, then I would challenge the OP to actually demonstrate that claim to be true. No, rather it much more likely that the OP defines facts as those propositions to which they themselves subscribe.
However a rather cursory perusal of the dictionary would refute such an understanding. That is itself a fact verifiable by all. Perhaps the OP will notice that I here refer to something being a fact, from which they draw the conclusion that I do believe in the existence of facts, contrary to the question’s assumption.
Furthermore, what would they even be understanding under the concept of logic? Logic is nothing but the valid reasoning from some some set of assumptions to a conclusion. Assumptions are themselves neither logical nor illogical. They are simply propositions that either are or are not accepted. There is nothing illogical in making the assumption that invisible pink unicorns exist and seeing what the consequences thereof would be.
No, rather the OP is here simply repeating the earlier claim that liberals do not believe in facts, which as shown above, is an abuse of language, since what they really mean is that liberals do not accept that the propositions designated as facts by the, presumably non-liberal OP, are actually facts at all, as opposed to mere claims, often presented with no evidence that they even might be true.
This labeling of propositions as facts true of the world rather than as assumptions made on the world, constitutes either gross intellectual dishonesty or gross ignorance. You may take your pick.
- You misspelled “conservative.”
Which side is on the side of science, again? And which side is fighting tooth and nail against it?
I might have some conservative leanings but I don’t consider it safe to vote for a Republican. Not the individuals, but as a party, they are currently stark raving mad, and a threat to the Republic. - I do not believe it is a fact that liberals don’t believe in facts and logic.
If you think it is a fact that liberals don’t believe in facts and logic, then you will doubtless conclude that there is one particular fact that this particular liberal does not believe in. If you have the slightest ability in logic, you yourself will be able to construct a tu quoque response on my behalf.
Obama, Pelosi did not want Kamala Harris to be nominee: Democratic megadonor - Yahoo News; November 2024
Democratic megadonor John Morgan criticized the failed Harris-Walz campaign in an interview, claiming that Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi were opposed to Kamala Harris becoming the Democratic nominee after President Biden stepped down in July. Although Biden endorsed Harris immediately, Obama waited five days to do so, which Morgan interpreted as a sign of resistance. He argued that Biden’s quick endorsement was a defiant move meant to send a message to party leaders who had pressured him to step aside.
Morgan also slammed the Harris campaign’s spending, citing reports of $20 million in debt and calling the operation “self-congratulatory” and fiscally irresponsible. He said this mismanagement should disqualify Harris from running for president again, noting that many donors felt misled. He further criticized the lack of a democratic primary process, stating that Harris was selected without a vote, contradicting the party’s stated values. Despite her debate performance, Morgan concluded Harris was “not ready for prime time” and had faltered under national pressure.
Is the Truth Liberal? - Intellectual Freedom Blog; 2020
I headed back into the classroom this year as my school’s Journalism Newspaper teacher (in addition to serving as the Upper School librarian), and one of the first tasks I completed was signing up for newsletters from the News Literacy Project (The Sift) and the Center for News Literacy (The Feed). Browsing through the most recent issue of The Feed, I paused after perusing the article titles because I couldn’t help noticing a pattern: the truth appears to be liberal.
Of course that wording is a bit facetious; the truth doesn’t care about political leanings and exists outside of our restrictive bubbles of analysis. But how we discern what’s accurate and factual from what is misleading and not truthful reveals a thing or two about labels.
This is my 16th year working in education as a high school classroom teacher and as a school librarian, and I’ve always taken care not to reveal my own political leanings and personal beliefs on issues. As an AP English Language and Composition teacher, I tried to ensure my students read a variety of opinions on topics.
But that was before the 2016 election and the age of Trump and COVID-19. Now with the 2020 Election at hand as well, those are unavoidable topics in any journalism classroom. Nor should they be avoided. Students must be given the opportunity to encounter contentious topics and learn how to filter all types of information.
I found myself feeling a little apprehensive last week, though, when I realized that all of our misinformation mini-lessons were indeed related to misinformation coming from the White House or right-wing extremist groups. Even the FBI had to step in and release an official statement about the bogus claims linking Antifa and California wildfires. While all the students were in agreement about the existence of the sources of this misinformation, I couldn’t help but feel that old impulse to provide other points of view, and then my line of thinking screeched to a halt: there is no other point of view when the topic is false information.
Now my driving question reveals a bit of an existential crisis: Do I show bias in my classroom if I share the truth?
Consider this NPR article stating that Facebook removed a Trump post falsely claiming the flu is deadlier than COVID-19. It provides a powerful teaching moment, encouraging students to reflect on the power of social media to spread ideas that can impact a person’s health, and whether or not a label of misleading information would suffice rather than outright removal (Twitter’s approach). Think Facebook doesn’t matter? The Digital New Deal project of the German Marshall Fund of the United States found that interaction with false media outlets on Facebook has increased 102 percent since 2016.
Are people of a particular political persuasion more likely to consume false news and believe it? Consider NPR’s 2016 interview of Jestin Coler, a false news creator who shared that there were attempts “to write fake news for liberals — but they just never take the bait.”
Most false news websites tracked to Veles, Macedonia, favored Trump and targeted conservative readers by taking real news stories and sensationalizing them. The bottom line is people would not create false information without a real financial incentive and will only continue creating what makes more money.
Ultimately, I consoled myself with the thought that actually there is no crisis on this topic because, much like how a school librarian provides access to information without judgment or interpretation, a classroom teacher’s job is very similar. It’s not my concern that the truth, in this case the source of dangerously false information, stems from particular political persuasions. I can only concern myself with ensuring students learn how to be critical consumers of information.
