The Whys of American Ignorance

[marmar]

from Consortium News:


The Whys of American Ignorance
April 6, 2013

Since the social upheavals of the Sixties, the American Establishment has sought to constrain critical thinking through a variety of techniques, from propaganda to government secrecy to the celebrated ignorance of Fox News. But there are broader societal pressures as well, notes Lawrence Davidson.

By Lawrence Davidson


In 2008, Rick Shenkman, the Editor-in-Chief of the History News Network, published a book entitled Just How Stupid Are We? Facing the Truth about the American Voter. In it he demonstrated, among other things, that most Americans were: (1) ignorant about major international events, (2) knew little about how their own government runs and who runs it, (3) were nonetheless willing to accept government positions and policies even though a moderate amount of critical thought suggested they were bad for the country, and (4) were readily swayed by stereotyping, simplistic solutions, irrational fears and public relations babble.

Shenkman spent 256 pages documenting these claims, using a great number of polls and surveys from very reputable sources. Indeed, in the end it is hard to argue with his data. So, what can we say about this?

One thing that can be said is that this is not an abnormal state of affairs. As has been suggested in prior analyses, ignorance of non-local affairs (often leading to inaccurate assumptions, passive acceptance of authority, and illogical actions) is, in fact, a default position for any population.

To put it another way, the majority of any population will pay little or no attention to news stories or government actions that do not appear to impact their lives or the lives of close associates. If something non-local happens that is brought to their attention by the media, they will passively accept government explanations and simplistic solutions. ....................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/04/06/the-whys-of-american-ignorance/

[KG]

1. americans happily believe in fairey tales, starting with how this country was founded.

Last edited Sat Apr 6, 2013, 07:13 PM - Edit history (1)

[Mnemosyne]

2. K&R nt

[Buzz Clik]

3. Are there examples of leftwing stupidity? Anti-science, believe-the-propaganda nonsense?

[Archae]

4. Not really anymore, but...

Decades ago, the ultra-left like "Students for a Democratic Society" and actual (as opposed to just accused) communists.

I remember an SDS meeting in the early 70's that broke up after Maoist factions got into fistfights with Democratic party people.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Gratefully we fully embrace facts, rational thought, and a scientific basis for all our claims.

Unlike certain groups of knuckledraggers who shall remain nameless.

[Archae]

6. We do?

Just look up Bill Maher, Jim Carrey, vaccines and autism in posts here.

[Buzz Clik]

8. I was being massively sarcastic.

Hysteria is the norm at DU. Facts are optional, and science be damned.

[Archae]

9. Not as bad as Free Republic, but still bad.

At times, and certain topics. yes.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

7. I suspect that "teach critical thinking" is nothing more than an empty slogan.

I'd want to know exactly what these "lessons in critical thinking" would be.

And I'd then want to see spending time on them justified directly on the grounds of the value of what was in the lessons, not on the two-step grounds of 1) these lessons do something like teaching "critical thinking" and 2) teaching critical thinking is a good thing.

Too many policies are justified by reference to their declared goal, not their likely outcome.

[Ron Obvious]

10. Of course

People who can think critically are less susceptible to advertising & religion, see through political BS and are more likely to question authority.

Nobody wants that.

I actually fondly remember an introduction to probability when I was around 10 years old or so. It was age -appropriate material designed to make us question our assumptions and to encourage us to actually find out the answers through investigation. I remember a case where we had to determine if tossing 2 coins, producing 2 heads, 2 tails or mixed head/tails was a fair way to pick between three people. Most of us thought it was, but by running the experiment we found out it wasn't and why.

I think something like that would be just as interesting to children today, and I'd love to see it in schools.