Where do our political beliefs come from?

Here is at statement I believe almost all of us would find to be true:  Most the people we know believe their political beliefs are correct and to the extent that other people don't share their beliefs the other people are wrong.  I know that I experience a visceral emotional reaction when someone contradicts some political belief I hold.


How can I (and most other people) feel so certain about our ideas when people who are just as certain hold contradictory ideas.  Perhaps our certainty reflects our emotions rather than reality?  How can we know if our political beliefs reflect real truths?  Where do our beliefs come from?


I started wondering about that a couple decades ago.  Here are some things I have learned:


Probably for many of us our initial political beliefs come from our upbringing.  When we register to vote we don't have to know anything (we humans have no problem manufacturing opinions out of thin air).  We don't take a test to prove we have some level of competency the way we do to get, for example, a drivers license.  So we adopt the ideology we have been exposed to from our parents, (or the opposite of our parents in some cases) or our peers. 


Some of our political beliefs derive from biology.  One example of a biological influence is the nuerotransmitter Oxytocin.  What the brain science says is lots of Oxytocin inclines us to submerge our self interest to the community interest, while low levels of Oxytocin makes us more self absorbed and oblivious to community interests.  Contemplate for yourself how that correlates to political ideologies.  Would it be an exaggeration to say that having lots of Oxytocin in our brains makes us Socialists, while low Oxytocin makes us barbarian Capitalists?


We also know from the biologists that women tend to have more Oxytocin, men less.  From political science we know women are more likely to be Democrats and men more likely to be Republicans.  Hmmmm.   Think this says something about Oxytocin influence in our choice of political ideologies?


I'm not aware of any studies on the topic, but I would imagine where our Oxytocin inclination matchs up with the ideology of our upbringing we are probably very certain our ideology is right.  Where our Oxytocin inclination is contrary to our ideology of upbringing we may be less dogmatic and more open minded.


Regardless of the particular mix of upbringing and biology that produces our political beliefs once we have started making decisions based on our adopted ideology we start casting our beliefs in stone.  Our brain is designed to avoid relearning things for efficient decision making.  When we make a decision once, unless there is some bad result, our emotions send us down that same mental path in the future.  This works well in day to day life because we get feedback.  Ooops, my girlfriend dumped me, time to rethink the decisions I made in that relationship.  Oooops, I got fired, time to rethink the decisions I made in that job.


But politics seldom gives us the kind of feedback about the wisdom of our decisions that we get in normal life.  When our candidate loses an election we don't question our ideology, we question the intelligence of the people who voted for the other candidate.  Since politics and economics are so complex, and everyone is pointing at the other guy as the problem, it is often really hard to sort out who is right and who is wrong, so we stay with the emotional comfort of our ideological leanings.


I concluded some years ago if I wanted my political decisions to really contribute to the kind of future I want for me and my loved ones I needed to get beyond the beliefs to which I am emotionally attached.  I need to step outside my emotions to understand where my beliefs came from and find a way to constantly test the truth of my beliefs with facts and data.  


I try hard but as with most people, life often gets in the way.  There are only so many hours in the day.  Jobs, family, friends, exercise and just having some fun take a lot of time.  Fairly regularly I find myself getting ready to vote and having to fall back on ideology because I haven't had time to research beyond sound bites and assertions.  


Replacing emotion and ideology with facts and data is a not easy.  The temptation to go the easy route - follow some sound bite that appeals to our emotions - is always an option for a quick decision that protects our time to do other things.  But I have found not testing emotional beliefs can have a price.  A lot of people relying on ideology got blindsided by the housing collapse and economic meltdown of a few years ago, and are getting whacked again by the sagging economy and stock market.  Because for the last decade or two I have been testing the ideological fads of the moment against history and common sense about economics and human behavior I was able to dodge some of the worst effects of the recent downturn(s).  But a number of bright, educated and hard working younger people I care about in that young families stage in life got caught up in it and now face daunting financial challenges. 


Sadly, it was avoidable if we had been better, more educated voters.

An alternative to Unions

In most human endeavors the successful enterprises are teams.   Yet in most business relationships the basic nature of unions and management relations is adversarial.  This is partly historical accident, partly a result of the ideological notion held by some people that unfettered free enterprise always produces the best result.


How could we make enterprises operate more as a team, and less as adversaries?  Sometimes hard times forces that kind of behavior, as we have seen in the auto industry, but that only happened when the industry was on the verge of collapse and both sides perceived that a big part of the industries problems was the adversarial nature of the relationship that inhibited innovation.


What if we could make enterprises work as a team before they are facing a disaster?  If we aligned the factors motivating people to make enterprise goals everyone's primary goal.


What if we made Corporate tax rates a sliding scale.  The flatter a corporations pay structure, the lower the corporate tax rate.  Measure the average rate of compensation from the deviation from the mean of the top and the bottom.  As the tide rises all boats do actually rise.  Exclude dividends from the computation if they are paid to someone not involved in management of the corporation, (or held in trust until some years after an employees tenure with the corporation ends).


If someone wants to run their corporation as their fiefdom, pay employee's as little as possible and take as much as possible, they are imposing real costs on society - from health care costs, to reducing the number of consumer dollars available to support the greater economy.  When workers have money to spend the economy grows, when management hoards money the economy suffers.  We should reward companies that share the risk and reward with workers without forcing employee's to band together to demand it..