re: #199 Obdicut

I think that you’re also making a mistake in talking about ‘both sides’ wanting a certain outcome.

So then, you must be operating on some assumptions about what I mean by “tribalism.” Which seems to contradict your next statements.

I also don’t think there are two different desired outcomes.

Fair point. There are more than two specific desired outcomes. But it is certainly striking how depending which website you visit, or radio show you listen to, or TV show you watch, or the broad ideological/political orientation of the writer of the blog comment you read, you can see a roughly defined binary distinction w/r/t overall view on the issue.

Again, this goes back to well-established literature on how identify (social, cultural, and/or political) largely drive how people reason in the face of controversy - in particular on issues that have so much overlap with political/social/cultural issues. There is a lot of literature that suggests that these orientations largely drive how humans reason.

Some people ‘want’ Zimmerman found guilty, others ‘want’ to have the law applied justly even if they think the law is terrible, and they ‘want’ the law to be rewritten because they feel it protects people in Zimmerman’s position. Other people ‘want’ the charges to be dropped, others ‘want’ Zimmerman to be found innocent, others ‘want’ it to be revealed that Martin actually was armed and they just found his fearsome black mans gun in the grass so Zimmerman was all great.

No doubt. And others want, desperately, for the evidence to fall out towards a narrative of the events that I think reflects a largely binary political orientation w/r/t racial issues. On the one side, they’re looking for the evidence to support the view that racial inequality is still a very significant problem in this country, or that Republicans pass bad laws at the behest of the NRA. In other words, a largely left perspective.

On the other side, they’re looking for the evidence to support the view that blacks are “playing the race card,” are “race-baiting,” are seeking to perpetuate a bogus sense of victimhood, etc. In other words, a largely right perspective.

Of course there’s a lot of nuance there - but I don’t see how someone can look at the diametrically opposed views largely held on the different sides of the political spectrum and not see a largely tribal phenomenon. Of course other significant patterns emerge - say the difference, generally, in the views of blacks and whites on these tyhpes of issues.

Reducing stuff to two sides is always silly. Then adding ‘tribalism’ on top of that is even sillier, to me. I do not think you are in the least bit correct that most of those who want to see Zimmerman tried and convicted are being ‘tribal’ or ‘partisan’ or anything of the sort.

I think that a non-tribal view would essentially be one that simply wants the facts to win out. Martin’s mom is a very good example of that. When I see people firmly convinced of how to interpret highly ambiguous data - as I’ve seen all over w/r/t this case, I see something that suggests tribalism to me.

Anyway, so now you know more about my views. I’m going to leave this here.