President Donald Trump’s most ardent supporters are motivated by their prejudices, not economic concerns, social scientists contend. Will Democrats stop trying to win their votes?
In January, Smith and his University of Kansas colleague, associate sociology professor Eric A. Hanley, published a 47-page paper deconstructing the Republican president’s appeal. Building on decades of scholarship about the lure of authoritarianism and their own analysis of American voting psychology in 2012 and 2016, the social scientists make an argument that some may find offensive and others unsurprising.
It goes something like this: Trump’s biggest supporters are motivated by bigotry and want him to hurt the people they dislike.
Note: There’s a lot to unpack in this article, and this just seems to be the hook.
I agree with this. You don’t have to be consciously malicious for the fact that you refuse to think critically to make you a bad person. This planet and species doesn’t have time to forgive that shit anymore.
To refine my previous claim, those who “don’t think too hard” can’t act like it’s a virtue or claim immunity from ridicule.
However, I don’t want to cross into the territory of punishing people of “thought-crime”, or more accurately in this case, “no-thought-crime”. I think it’s important to not legislate punitively against “not thinking too hard” to remain consistent with the principles of a free and open society.