3 ms·

> From the outside, the way American politics divides people is strange. The psychology of republicans vs democrats, tpartiers vs big staters seems more like th

> From the outside, the way American politics divides people is strange. The psychology of republicans vs democrats, tpartiers vs big staters seems more like the supporters of a sports team. That's exactly what it's like, and the worst thing (in my opinion) is how it has spread to every facet of American life, so that arguments over factual information are seen the same way. The country as a whole is far more concerned with winning or losing than with the actual significance of the "field" on which their "team" is "playing." Mind you, given how central sports is to American lifestyles[1], it's not like nobody could have seen this coming. But that doesn't reduce how dangerous it is. [1] Walk into any American high school. Chances are, the walls are lined with football trophies, and the faculty's letterhead is plastered with logos for the resident teams. The social hierarchy of the students revolves around the star players. Outcasts are called "losers."

rprospero 13y ago
Your experiences with high schools are different than the ones I've encountered. The social hierarchies aren't oriented around the sports team, but rather the standard hierarchy with the wealthy at the top and the poor at the bottom. Granted, there's some variation, and being athletically talented or aesthetically pleasing can move you up the hierarchy, but being poor and having both of those traits will only raise you as high as the ugliest, clumsiest, wealthy student. In four years of high school, I could only ever name one basketball player and that was only because he was my debate partner is speech class. I never knew who the quarterback on the football team was, despite hearing of some impressive victories. I was far more aware of the less popular sports (e.g. track, tennis, gymnastics), precisely because the team members in those sports came from higher income families and thus had more popular athletes.
- simonholroyd 13y ago
  I'm not disagreeing with your point regarding wealth, but football is the most popular men's high school sport (by participation) in the country so your experiences aren't likely the norm. Also track, tennis and gymnastics are mostly individual sports so they're less likely to be the ones driving the same level of school-wide support and pride (logos on the masthead, trophies in the hall, etc). Also HN readers might be unlikely to have had the average American high school experience.
drewcrawford 13y ago
While I agree with you, I think looking at this through the lens of only "hey look some irrational muggles" belies the fact that hackers do the EXACT SAME THING. Web vs native? Vi vs emacs? Tabs vs spaces? PHP vs... everybody else? TDD vs anti-TDD? Git vs Mercurial? I mean sure there are statistics and facts to back these views but there are also statistics and facts behind which sports team is the best or whether the debt ceiling is bad. There's no meaningful difference.
- shubb 13y ago
  I guess my point is, the difference between sports and politics is that sports don't really matter. Neither do the other things you list. TDD vs Anti-TDD for a self driving car. That matters. The engineer that decides that based on an online argument is going to jail when someone dies. Is mental illness real or should people just pull themselves together? Well we can banter about that, but if you are a psychologist deciding whether to release a patient from protective custody, you better follow evidence based best practice or you are in big trouble when they jump onto a freeway. That last example is kinda important - when we talk about politics, it feels like it is just banter. Like we don't have to have nuanced, well formed opinions because who cares what we think anyway. We only have one tiny little vote right? But democracy is driven by the average. And if the average views politics as the same as an internet flamewar (which is what you said right?) then democracy says that politics becomes an internet flamewar. And... well, what I'm saying is, oh look, it kinda has. You know, poor Americans die about 20 years younger than average ones. I'm not saying that is your fault, and I'm not saying the solution is mandatory health insurance or glorious revolution. I'm just saying it's kinda fucked up. And I'm saying the real issues don't seem to get debated. Not really. Because... the public want a flamewar. See, America needs to do something about it's debt levels. Probably. And the answer to that is probably years of slow deficit reductions, best done when the economy is growing (accepting it will take a chunk out of that growth). And America probably needs to do something about it's poor, because things are becoming less equal, and if you go for a walk around Mexico City late at night looking swag, you will find out that isn't a situation you want to have. But the solution to that is hard an slow and boring and probably involves scaling back this free trade thing a bit. But the conversation about debt is either continue borrowing like crazy or massively scale back, both of which mean doom, so neither of which happen. The answer to the poor problem is too nuanced to be discussed, except in terms of rage against the rich or people on SSI depending on your team of choice. I dunno, that was sort of my point. I think it tailed off toward the end...
bmelton 13y ago
Oddly enough, I get a lot of flack from my friends for being an openly fair weather fan. With politics, I support policies, not politicians. I understand the draw for rooting for the guy who 'thinks like you', or, if you find somebody who 'gets it', but the flip side of that is that it's hard to reconcile where they're wrong. A lot of people will actually conform their own beliefs to match the beliefs of a politician they like. Polls of the NSA surveillance highlighted some of this; many Democrats who hated the PATRIOT Act under Bush didn't mind its abuses under Obama, and similarly, many Republicans who were okay with the law under Bush hated its uses by the Obama administration. Same law, same nonsense, and admittedly, Obama made at least a token effort to instate the FISA court, if only to give it the appearance of fairness. With sports though, I'm exactly the same. I'm a Ravens fan, but if we don't make the playoffs, I'll pick another team that's convenient and start rooting for them. If we have a years' long streak of bad luck, like the Bills, or the Browns, I'll jump ship and root for a better team. Yes, that makes me a 'traitor' to many 'real fans', but the counter is that I don't get anything out of being a fan other than some manufactured emotions. If it were Green Bay, and I owned shares, that'd be a little bit different, I suppose, but until and unless I get some kind of perk for a winning season (beyond the one I want most, which is to see my team make the playoffs), I just don't see the logic in being wed to them arbitrarily.
- niels_olson 13y ago
  > Polls of the NSA surveillance highlighted some of this citation?
  - vidarh 13y ago
    http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-nsa-data-diving http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-ns...
grey-area 13y ago
This is not particular to American society, you can see the same in France (where the left and right divide originated), the UK or any other country or indeed religion - people are tribal, and don't really care about details enough - the sense of belonging to a group and the rewards that brings trumps judging issues individually on their merits.
vidarh 13y ago
I've always found the US high school obsession with sports teams very fascinating. Growing up in Norway, I can say that I don't even know if my school had any sports teams. It is possible - some do - but to the extent they do it's usually something pretty much only those on the teams care about.

rprospero 13y ago

Your experiences with high schools are different than the ones I've encountered. The social hierarchies aren't oriented around the sports team, but rather the standard hierarchy with the wealthy at the top and the poor at the bottom. Granted, there's some variation, and being athletically talented or aesthetically pleasing can move you up the hierarchy, but being poor and having both of those traits will only raise you as high as the ugliest, clumsiest, wealthy student. In four years of high school, I could only ever name one basketball player and that was only because he was my debate partner is speech class. I never knew who the quarterback on the football team was, despite hearing of some impressive victories. I was far more aware of the less popular sports (e.g. track, tennis, gymnastics), precisely because the team members in those sports came from higher income families and thus had more popular athletes.

simonholroyd 13y ago
I'm not disagreeing with your point regarding wealth, but football is the most popular men's high school sport (by participation) in the country so your experiences aren't likely the norm. Also track, tennis and gymnastics are mostly individual sports so they're less likely to be the ones driving the same level of school-wide support and pride (logos on the masthead, trophies in the hall, etc). Also HN readers might be unlikely to have had the average American high school experience.

drewcrawford 13y ago

While I agree with you, I think looking at this through the lens of only "hey look some irrational muggles" belies the fact that hackers do the EXACT SAME THING. Web vs native? Vi vs emacs? Tabs vs spaces? PHP vs... everybody else? TDD vs anti-TDD? Git vs Mercurial? I mean sure there are statistics and facts to back these views but there are also statistics and facts behind which sports team is the best or whether the debt ceiling is bad. There's no meaningful difference.

shubb 13y ago
I guess my point is, the difference between sports and politics is that sports don't really matter. Neither do the other things you list. TDD vs Anti-TDD for a self driving car. That matters. The engineer that decides that based on an online argument is going to jail when someone dies. Is mental illness real or should people just pull themselves together? Well we can banter about that, but if you are a psychologist deciding whether to release a patient from protective custody, you better follow evidence based best practice or you are in big trouble when they jump onto a freeway. That last example is kinda important - when we talk about politics, it feels like it is just banter. Like we don't have to have nuanced, well formed opinions because who cares what we think anyway. We only have one tiny little vote right? But democracy is driven by the average. And if the average views politics as the same as an internet flamewar (which is what you said right?) then democracy says that politics becomes an internet flamewar. And... well, what I'm saying is, oh look, it kinda has. You know, poor Americans die about 20 years younger than average ones. I'm not saying that is your fault, and I'm not saying the solution is mandatory health insurance or glorious revolution. I'm just saying it's kinda fucked up. And I'm saying the real issues don't seem to get debated. Not really. Because... the public want a flamewar. See, America needs to do something about it's debt levels. Probably. And the answer to that is probably years of slow deficit reductions, best done when the economy is growing (accepting it will take a chunk out of that growth). And America probably needs to do something about it's poor, because things are becoming less equal, and if you go for a walk around Mexico City late at night looking swag, you will find out that isn't a situation you want to have. But the solution to that is hard an slow and boring and probably involves scaling back this free trade thing a bit. But the conversation about debt is either continue borrowing like crazy or massively scale back, both of which mean doom, so neither of which happen. The answer to the poor problem is too nuanced to be discussed, except in terms of rage against the rich or people on SSI depending on your team of choice. I dunno, that was sort of my point. I think it tailed off toward the end...

bmelton 13y ago

Oddly enough, I get a lot of flack from my friends for being an openly fair weather fan. With politics, I support policies, not politicians. I understand the draw for rooting for the guy who 'thinks like you', or, if you find somebody who 'gets it', but the flip side of that is that it's hard to reconcile where they're wrong. A lot of people will actually conform their own beliefs to match the beliefs of a politician they like. Polls of the NSA surveillance highlighted some of this; many Democrats who hated the PATRIOT Act under Bush didn't mind its abuses under Obama, and similarly, many Republicans who were okay with the law under Bush hated its uses by the Obama administration. Same law, same nonsense, and admittedly, Obama made at least a token effort to instate the FISA court, if only to give it the appearance of fairness. With sports though, I'm exactly the same. I'm a Ravens fan, but if we don't make the playoffs, I'll pick another team that's convenient and start rooting for them. If we have a years' long streak of bad luck, like the Bills, or the Browns, I'll jump ship and root for a better team. Yes, that makes me a 'traitor' to many 'real fans', but the counter is that I don't get anything out of being a fan other than some manufactured emotions. If it were Green Bay, and I owned shares, that'd be a little bit different, I suppose, but until and unless I get some kind of perk for a winning season (beyond the one I want most, which is to see my team make the playoffs), I just don't see the logic in being wed to them arbitrarily.

niels_olson 13y ago
> Polls of the NSA surveillance highlighted some of this citation?
- vidarh 13y ago
  http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-nsa-data-diving http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-ns...

grey-area 13y ago

This is not particular to American society, you can see the same in France (where the left and right divide originated), the UK or any other country or indeed religion - people are tribal, and don't really care about details enough - the sense of belonging to a group and the rewards that brings trumps judging issues individually on their merits.

vidarh 13y ago

I've always found the US high school obsession with sports teams very fascinating. Growing up in Norway, I can say that I don't even know if my school had any sports teams. It is possible - some do - but to the extent they do it's usually something pretty much only those on the teams care about.