Podcast Summary: "Good Reasonable People with Keith Payne" on Here's Where It Gets Interesting

Released on December 16, 2024, hosted by Sharon McMahon

Introduction to the Episode

In this compelling episode of Here's Where It Gets Interesting, host Sharon McMahon engages in a deep and insightful conversation with Keith Payne, author of Good Reasonable People: The Psychology Behind America's Dangerous Divide. The discussion delves into the psychological and sociological factors contributing to the intense political polarization in the United States.

1. The Core Thesis of Good Reasonable People

Sharon McMahon begins by addressing the apparent scarcity of "good, reasonable people" in contemporary online discourse, particularly on platforms like the internet. She questions why civil and rational conversations seem so rare in today's political climate.

Keith Payne responds by clarifying the book's premise: Good Reasonable People doesn't claim that everyone is inherently good and reasonable. Instead, it highlights a common human tendency to view oneself and one's own group as good and reasonable. This self-perception creates a barrier to understanding and empathizing with those holding differing views.

Keith Payne [04:00]: "Once you start from that assumption that I'm good and the people who belong to my groups are also good, then it sets up the context in which no matter what one group says, the other doesn't seem to hear them and we bring out the worst in each other."

2. Group Identity and the Zero-Sum Game

The conversation progresses to explore how political affiliations have become intertwined with fundamental aspects of personal identity, such as race, gender, and nationality. This fusion transforms political debates into zero-sum games, where the success of one group is perceived as the failure of another.

Sharon McMahon [05:00]: "In many of our minds, it is a zero-sum game. In order for me to be good and reasonable, you must be evil and unreasonable."

Keith Payne agrees, emphasizing that this dichotomy exacerbates conflicts, making it difficult for individuals to see the humanity in those with opposing viewpoints.

3. The Two-Party System: A Unique American Challenge

Sharon McMahon then questions whether the two-party system in the U.S. uniquely contributes to this zero-sum mentality compared to multi-party systems in other countries.

Keith Payne acknowledges that while multi-party systems might mitigate some of these tensions, many still collapse into broad left-right coalitions. He asserts that the two-party system intensifies the zero-sum perception, as the binary choice leaves little room for compromise or mutual understanding.

Keith Payne [08:30]: "The two-party system makes it even more salient because it's a zero-sum game."

4. Historical Context of Political Realignment

The discussion shifts to the historical evolution of political alignments in the U.S., particularly how racial dynamics have shaped party affiliations over time. Keith Payne explains the realignment that occurred post the Civil Rights Movement, where support for civil rights convictions increasingly aligned African Americans with the Democratic Party and white conservatives with the Republican Party.

Keith Payne [09:50]: "Since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, the two parties started realigning around race in such a way that people who were for the civil rights movement moved more into the Democratic Party."

5. Tribalism and the Modern Political Landscape

Sharon McMahon posits that tribalism, historically crucial for survival, now manifests in political affiliations, a relatively new phenomenon in human societal structures. This tribal-like allegiance to political parties overrides previous survival-based group identities.

Keith Payne concurs, noting that while humans have always organized into tribes, the current political climate masks these affiliations under the guise of ideological discourse. He also points out that people's political identities often don't align with consistent, coherent principles.

Keith Payne [14:10]: "Most of us don't have very consistent opinions about policies and issues at all. We're kind of all over the map when it comes to principles and policies."

6. Moral Foundations Theory and Its Shortcomings

The conversation delves into the Moral Foundations Theory, which suggests that liberals and conservatives prioritize different moral values. Sharon McMahon highlights Keith Payne's critique of this theory, which argues that while the theory identifies differences, it doesn't explain the underlying reasons for these divergent worldviews.

Sharon McMahon [20:00]: "I would love to hear you talk a little bit more about why they don't help us understand how we see the world differently than somebody who's not like us."

Keith Payne asserts that the differences identified by the theory are minimal and oversimplify the complex interplay of social groups influencing political beliefs. He believes that social identities, such as race and geography, play a more significant role than the moral foundations themselves.

Keith Payne [21:01]: "We're actually organizing our politics around our social groups, and these foundations... are ways of making sense of it, but they're not really what's driving it."

7. The Influence of Geography and Demographics

Sharon McMahon discusses how demographers can predict voting behaviors based on zip codes, which correlate with income, race, education, and occupation. This predictive capability underscores the deep-rooted influence of one's environment on political leanings.

Sharon McMahon [22:49]: "People are shocked to learn that demographers can predict with fairly high accuracy who they are likely to vote for based on their zip code."

Keith Payne explains that these demographics often precede political orientations, suggesting that one's environment and social group heavily influence political beliefs from an early age.

8. Sibling Dynamics and Divergent Political Views

A particularly insightful segment explores how siblings, raised in the same household, can develop significantly different political beliefs. Sharon McMahon poses the question of how identical upbringing can result in divergent worldviews.

Keith Payne shares his personal experience as one of seven siblings, noting that educational trajectories play a pivotal role. Those who attend college tend to adopt more liberal views, while those who do not may lean more conservative. He emphasizes that personality differences and individual choices, even within the same family, contribute to these disparities.

Keith Payne [33:24]: "More college education is associated with more liberal views compared to those without a college degree."

9. Utilizing Insights to Bridge Political Divides

When asked about actionable steps, Keith Payne emphasizes the importance of focusing on commonalities rather than differences. He advocates for maintaining civil discourse by recognizing that disagreements should remain confined to political arenas, avoiding personal conflicts and violence.

Keith Payne [39:04]: "My goal is to keep us fighting over them at the ballot box and not with guns and bullets."

He also highlights the value of preserving personal relationships by compartmentalizing political differences, allowing friendships and family bonds to thrive despite ideological disparities.

10. Understanding Why People Reject Facts

In the latter part of the episode, Sharon McMahon addresses a frustration many share: the tendency of individuals to reject factual information that contradicts their beliefs. Using the analogy of someone believing the moon is made of green cheese, she questions why facts are often dismissed outright.

Keith Payne explains that this phenomenon occurs because factual disagreements are tied to personal identity. When confronted with facts that challenge deeply held beliefs, individuals perceive it as a threat to their self-concept and group affiliation. Consequently, they reject the information to protect their identity rather than engage with the facts objectively.

Keith Payne [44:49]: "If you say that I'm wrong about something that's important to who I am, I'm probably wrong about lots of other things."

11. Strategies for Productive Conversations

To navigate conversations where facts are rejected, Keith Payne suggests shifting the focus from arguing facts to understanding the underlying reasons why certain beliefs are important to the individual. Instead of labeling someone as wrong, asking questions about what the belief means to them can lead to more meaningful and less confrontational dialogues.

Keith Payne [50:57]: "Ask why is this important to you? What does this mean to you?"

Sharon McMahon echoes this sentiment, emphasizing the importance of listening to understand rather than to refute, fostering empathy and deeper connections even amidst disagreements.

Conclusion

The episode concludes with Sharon McMahon expressing her appreciation for Keith Payne's insights and endorsing his book, Good Reasonable People. She encourages listeners to engage with the material to better understand the complex factors driving America's political divisions and to strive for more empathetic and constructive interactions despite ideological differences.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• Keith Payne [04:00]: "Once you start from that assumption that I'm good and the people who belong to my groups are also good, then it sets up the context in which no matter what one group says, the other doesn't seem to hear them and we bring out the worst in each other."

• Sharon McMahon [05:00]: "In many of our minds, it is a zero-sum game. In order for me to be good and reasonable, you must be evil and unreasonable."

• Keith Payne [14:10]: "Most of us don't have very consistent opinions about policies and issues at all. We're kind of all over the map when it comes to principles and policies."

• Sharon McMahon [20:00]: "I would love to hear you talk a little bit more about why they don't help us understand how we see the world differently than somebody who's not like us."

• Keith Payne [21:01]: "We're actually organizing our politics around our social groups, and these foundations... are ways of making sense of it, but they're not really what's driving it."

• Sharon McMahon [22:49]: "People are shocked to learn that demographers can predict with fairly high accuracy who they are likely to vote for based on their zip code."

• Keith Payne [33:24]: "More college education is associated with more liberal views compared to those without a college degree."

• Keith Payne [44:49]: "If you say that I'm wrong about something that's important to who I am, I'm probably wrong about lots of other things."

• Keith Payne [50:57]: "Ask why is this important to you? What does this mean to you?"

For more insights and to explore the topics discussed, consider reading Good Reasonable People by Keith Payne.