I did two one-hour lectures on Bill Clinton’s Presidency; specifically, his domestic and foreign policies, and although the professor gave me the highest marks of everyone in the class, and admitted in the discussion following my lectures, that Bill Clinton was not liberal nor conservative, he flatly stated he would never have voted for Clinton.
He also dismisses environmentalists with a metaphorical wave of the hand. This strikes me as odd since he comes across as a very logical, break-it-down and understand it type of guy. He’ll explain things by breaking them down to simple pieces. He commonly does this and instructs us to do the same. Now, if he’s so logical, why is he unable to reconcile science with his political beliefs?
It’s an emotional thing. People develop deep ties with their beliefs, coming to identify with them. Not, “I have liberal beliefs,” but “I am a liberal.” (I am a liberal!) This makes an attack upon the ideas feel like an attack upon the person. This, in turn, promotes reaction-based psychological defenses.
The best approach is a slow, gentle, considerate, non-confrontational approach. Instead of a head-on charge, start digging peripheral siege trenches.
It can work! People sometimes do change their views after thoughtful debate. I used to be a much harder-edged “gun grabber” and my anti-theistic views resembled Der Trihs’s. Debate in fora akin to the SDMB helped me move toward a (slightly) more moderate position.
A friend of mine used to be an anarchist. Years of studied debate turned him into a minimum-state libertarian instead. Personal growth, education, and self-betterment are all possible!
Maybe it’s a class prejudice in disguise? I have a sister kind of like that … she is an ardent environmentalist and vegetarian, with a strong emotional reaction to kittens, flowers, birds, etc … Always votes for the most lefty/environmentalist candidate at the local level …
BUT
She LOATHES Obama, with an extremely negative visceral reaction to his demeanor and body language (“shifty, sleazy used car salesman”…) Loathed Clinton in the exact same way. LOVED Romney and Bush Senior. Thinks everyone except blue-blood upper class folks are essentially soulless, and lousy stewards of the environment. (I don’t bother asking!)
My understanding is there are certain emotional underpinnings to political beliefs. I don’t know them all but conservatives are more uncomfortable with uncertainty and grey areas, so they can be more dogmatic and see things as black and white. Liberals tend to be egalitarian, so if you attempt to bring up the negative effects of egalitarianism and assuming all people are equal (like the theory of IQ and race, or race and crime, or gender differences, rich vs poor culture, etc) some can get upset.
What did he say about environmentalists? A highly logical type would probably respond to some of their claims with specific agreement, and other claims with a :rolleyes:.