Previously on this Substack, I have written about the growth of low liberalism, a non-elite and crude form of liberalism. Whilst such voters think ideologically, their conceptual understanding is limited and they embrace populist methods, failing to understand that, in a liberal democracy, politics should have limits. Substantively, low liberals combine traditional liberalism (e.g. support for immigration) with parts of social justice ideology (e.g. support for the pulling down of statues) and authoritarianism (e.g. support for the jailing of conservative opponents).
I suspect the reason for this is that conservatives are generally less ideological. A significant streak in conservatism runs thusly: "a good reason for holding power is to stop the other side from holding power because they have bonkers ideas about what they want to do with it".
The hardening of attitudes and deepening of mutual resentment or contempt between broad political viewpoints just feels like an inevitable consequence of social and digital media. It was always discombobulating to see the other side several times a day, via newspapers or broadcast news schedules. But it took exposure during every waking hour of perusing a connected device to make it feel like a war. But it's multi-faceted. Desire for being seen as a 'leading light' leads to self-branding on social media which requires standing out. So rhetoric has to quickly push against customary boundaries.
Perhaps it's akin to the printing press encouraging non-elites to start publishing outrageous pamphlets. But scaled massively in terms of reach and tempo.
Good to know you're across the data. I'll look forward to more. Merry Christmas to one of my favourite stackers.
Just to let you know that the 'barristers' link takes one to a page with this message: this page is private. Try signing in with a different email, or letting the author know they've linked to a private page.
I suspect the reason for this is that conservatives are generally less ideological. A significant streak in conservatism runs thusly: "a good reason for holding power is to stop the other side from holding power because they have bonkers ideas about what they want to do with it".
The hardening of attitudes and deepening of mutual resentment or contempt between broad political viewpoints just feels like an inevitable consequence of social and digital media. It was always discombobulating to see the other side several times a day, via newspapers or broadcast news schedules. But it took exposure during every waking hour of perusing a connected device to make it feel like a war. But it's multi-faceted. Desire for being seen as a 'leading light' leads to self-branding on social media which requires standing out. So rhetoric has to quickly push against customary boundaries.
Perhaps it's akin to the printing press encouraging non-elites to start publishing outrageous pamphlets. But scaled massively in terms of reach and tempo.
Good to know you're across the data. I'll look forward to more. Merry Christmas to one of my favourite stackers.
Just to let you know that the 'barristers' link takes one to a page with this message: this page is private. Try signing in with a different email, or letting the author know they've linked to a private page.