"They're the violent, crazy ones!": How polarization warps our views of our political opponents
People Who Read People: A Behavior and Psychology PodcastShow Notes
A major barrier to reducing toxic polarization is that so many of us—especially those who are highly politically involved—see our current toxic conflict as clearly the other side’s fault. People in both groups focus on the grievances that alarm them most but often struggle to understand what bothers their adversaries. From the outside, our opponents’ complaints can look minor, silly, or misinformed compared to our concerns, which we (naturally) see as legitimate and based in reality. The more we subscribe to these narratives, the more we risk becoming arrogant, convinced that “you’d have to be an idiot” not to see which group is worse and more at fault for our conflict and division. All this serves to fan the flames of toxic polarization.
This episode looks at how both political groups build their polarized, angry narratives where "it's all the other side's fault." This is a reading of a piece published on The Liberal Patriot: https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/its-all-the-other-sides-fault
More from People Who Read People: A Behavior and Psychology Podcast
How does someone make a living playing slot machines—and why would casinos let them? After joining professional gambler Chris Huang on a casino trip in Atlantic City, I talk with him about the unusual career of casino “advantage play” and how pro slot machine players capture the money left behind by other, less knowledgeable players. We explore why manufacturers create beatable machines, the psychological tricks that machine makers use to attract players, and the unethical actions some slot machine pros take to manipulate players into leaving profitable seats. Chris explains the risks pro slot machine players can encounter, how seemingly promising opportunities can turn into expensive mistakes, why a little knowledge can be dangerous, and what happens when you run out of cash in the middle of a long-term play. We also discuss online gambling “gurus” selling dubious claims of expertise, the secrecy and competition among slot professionals, and the appeal—and pressures—of making a living this way. Learn more about Chris at youtube.com/@gamblingeducationwithchris.
A talk with Andrew Thompson, a New York City-area private investigator and a researcher of criminal behavior. Andrew shares how he gets people talking while lacking the authority and command of a police badge, and what studying FBI crime cases and interrogations taught him about linguistic clues to deception in people’s stories. We also discuss his research into criminal psychological personality categories and how that may be tied to linguistic patterns. We discuss how mistaking signs of anxiety for guilt or deception can send investigators down very wrong paths; and how aggressive questioning can contribute to false confessions and other negative outcomes. We discuss why appearing uninterested in an important revelation from someone can sometimes encourage them to reveal more, and other tips on influencing and manipulating people in order to achieve investigative results. And Andrew discusses how AI advances have affected the investigative industry.
On this podcast I sometimes explore the “behavior expert” industry. One thing I'm curious about is the value people say that they’ve received from “behavior expert” trainings and certifications. This is a talk with Gallia Winkler, a psychological coach and a behavioral student of Joe Navarro’s; she’s been certified in his Body Language Expert Program. I ask her about what drives her interest in nonverbal behavior, what value she believes she’s gotten from Navarro's teachings, and how those teachings have helped her in her personal and professional life.
A talk with former CIA officer Kent Clizbe about the exaggerated, irresponsible claims made by many self-described “behavior experts,” focusing especially on Paul Ekman, Joe Navarro, microexpressions, and attempts to detect deception from body language. We discuss why facial expressions and physical movements cannot be interpreted through a universal dictionary, how cultural and individual differences make behavioral judgments especially difficult, and why nervousness or discomfort is rarely meaningful evidence of guilt or deception in high-stakes situations. We examine the failed TSA SPOT program, the influence of shows like “Lie to Me” (which was loosely based on Paul Ekman’s work), and the lack of convincing real-world, high-stakes examples supporting “behavior expert” claims. We also explore how behavioral hunches can contribute to tunnel vision, false confessions, and wrongful convictions; why games like poker can offer a more constrained and useful setting for behavioral reads; and why the most actionable information in high-stakes situations usually comes from what people say, what they leave out, and how their claims compare with known facts.
A talk with an Army Psychological Operations soldier about what military psy-op work really involves—and how different the reality is from many people's ideas about the nature of that work. We discuss his psy-op work in Afghanistan, why credibility and truth are usually much more persuasive and effective than deception, and fascinating historical operations involving surrender appeals, staged intelligence, and Vietnam’s eerie “ghost tapes.” We also explore the legal and ethical limits on influencing Americans, how social media has blurred those boundaries, how foreign influence campaigns exploit political polarization, and why “PSYOP” has become an all-purpose label for conspiracy theories. Finally, we examine the red flags that can help you identify self-proclaimed-but-deceptive military-persuasion experts (like Chase Hughes) who fabricate and exaggerate their credentials and experience to sell their psychology- and behavior-focused training and products.