FAIR USE NOTICE

FAIR USE NOTICE

A BEAR MARKET ECONOMICS BLOG

DEDICATED TO OCCUPY AND THE ECONOMIC REVOLUTION

OCCUPY THE MARKETPLACE

FOLLOW ME ON FACEBOOK

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates

All Blogs licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

Saturday, June 13, 2009

A Nation Neither United Nor Divided


Politics Done Right?


The Center For American Progress has a terrific new survey out on political ideology. The material in the survey is right up our alley, and is probably deserving of several posts, but I want to start with a relatively quick, 30,000-foot question: ideologically speaking, is there more that unites us as Americans or divides us?

The CAP survey posed 40 political and ideological statements to a group of 1,400 American adults, and asked them whether or not they agreed with them. You can answer the questions for yourself here; they cover a wide range of topics in the areas of economic and domestic policy, foreign affairs, societal and "values" issues, and the proper role of government. Although benchmark surveys of political ideology are nothing new, this is one of the most comprehensive and best-constructed efforts that I've seen.

But let's not worry too much about precisely what those questions were for now -- we'll look at that in a subsequent post. Let's simply take the answers to all 40 questions and plot them on a graph. On the vertical axis, we'll plot the percentage of self-described conservatives that agreed with a particular statement, and on the horizontal axis, the percentage of self-described progressives and liberals who did the same. (The CAP survey included separate categories for "progressive" and "liberal", which is another thing we'll look at sometime soon, but I've combined their answers for the time being). This is what we get when we do that:



If you're having trouble picking up on a pattern in that data, that's because there isn't one. The correlation between the fraction of conservatives and the fraction of liberals agreeing to a given question is essentially zero.

Is this surprising? Perhaps. If conservatives and liberals had fundamental disagreementson most major political questions, you'd expect to see a statistically significant inverse correlation in their responses. But you don't see that. Conversely, if they agreed on most of these fundamental questions, with the differences being only around the periphery, you'd expect to see a statistically significant positive correlation in their responses. But you don't really see that either.

Rather, it seems there's about as much that unites us as divides us. And although it's possible that this result is just an artifact of the particular questions that CAP posed, for some reason it feels like the "right" answer. Americans like appeals to bipartisanship and post-ideological politics -- but they also like good, old-fashioned partisan red meat. We're a complicated country, and we have complicated politics.

1 comment:

  1. To be continued:

    A few selected comments:

    Adam said...
    Interesting results. I wonder if we'd see correlations if we corrected for something else, like regional differences (e.g. somebody living in Alabama who describes himself as "progressive" might actually be considered "conservative" on a more universal scale). Actually, that leads to another interesting question - is this lack of correlation simply an artifact of how we define ourselves? Do most people believe very differently, and just define themselves as liberal or conservative in a way that's inconsistent with their answers to these questions?
    Probably not, but it could be interesting :)

    Also, Nate, you have "save" in the paragraph above the chart, where it should be "same."

    March 11, 2009 8:37 PM
    Dwight said...
    I see Patrick Star, with his head pointing up along the agree-agree diagonal. :D

    I think that the bottom left being mostly empty would suggest an actual 1 dimensional continuum! Although that could be very easily bias in the question creation/choice if the question designers were themselves thinking in that 1-dimension continuum.

    March 11, 2009 8:37 PM
    Randi said...
    I'd be interested more in this, Nate, if the self labeling was more like a Likert type scale like the individual responses in the survey were. I suspect that if we did that and then correlated the results of the survey with the scale of political identification we would see an inverse correlation. Another interesting question would be to simply have more self labeling possibilities: ie Socialist, Very Progressive, Progressive, Liberal Hawk, Independent Moderate, Democratic Moderate, Republican Moderate, Conservative, Social Conservative, Economic Conservative, NeoCon and Libertarian.

    I'm hoping you will be able to explore these questions.

    March 11, 2009 8:39 PM

    ReplyDelete