by Andrew Koslosky KGCHS, Contributing Writer
In politics, belief often trumps the truth, no pun intended. People cling to narratives that align with their values, identities, or desires, even when evidence contradicts them. This tendency, where individuals prioritize personal or ideological conviction over objective reality shapes our political behavior, from voters to the very leaders they elect.
Why is it that people believe what they want to believe?
Today we will attempt to piece it together as we explore the psychological, social, and cultural factors behind this phenomenon, its consequences, and the possible solutions.
When I relocated from the Big City up north, I had seen in this city the world of politics as a necessary evil, with the majority of folks in that world not representing their people and using their positions to gain personal wealth and notoriety. Now don’t get me wrong, their were some very good men and woman that I met along the way, but most fall into the category I mentioned above.
So why is this?
Human psychology drives the tendency to favor preferred beliefs over facts. Our brains seek comfort and often at the truth’s expense. My experience tells me that several mechanisms explain this in the political context.
Cognitive dissonance, a big word but a simple concept, occurs when conflicting beliefs cause discomfort. To ease this, people reject or reinterpret contradictory evidence.
For example, a voter might dismiss a candidate’s scandal to maintain faith in their choice, as admitting error feels too costly. It could be as simple as an elected official telling you they were going to vote one way and then vote completely in another.
Then, there is this thing I like to call Confirmation bias, which leads people to favor information that supports their views while ignoring opposing evidence. In politics, voters choose news that aligns with their beliefs. A conservative might watch Fox News, reinforcing anti-regulation beliefs, while a progressive follows MSNBC, affirming social justice views. Thus, we have a country divided and brainwashed by whatever news outlet that aligns with their beliefs. Then there is the Motivated reasoning thing that involves interpreting information to protect one’s beliefs.
For instance, during an economic slump, a ruling party’s supporters might blame global markets, while opponents point to government failure. The same data, rising unemployment, yet it yields opposing conclusions based on ideological goals.
How many times have you been told not to discuss religion or politics at the dinner table? Politics is emotional, with issues like immigration or healthcare evoking fear, hope, or anger. Emotions can override reason, making people receptive to claims that match their own feelings and rejecting anything contrary.
When examining the truth, the dinner table is the perfect place to discuss these issues, with patience, understanding and respect. Of course, if this was the way, the media wouldn’t get away with slanting their audience. Reminder, the media was established to report the news not to give commentary. I have a feeling journalists like Walter Cronkite, Chet Huntley and David Brinkley, are turning over in their graves over the present state of our media.
All of these factors are amplified by social and cultural dynamics. As social beings, our beliefs reflect the groups and societies we live in. Political beliefs signal loyalty to groups that are defined by their needs. Challenging group norms risks exclusion.
A Republican in a conservative town might deny climate change to fit in, while a progressive in a liberal city avoids questioning certain activist narratives to avoid backlash. Of course, this creates the Us-vs-Them Mentality. This is never a good way to govern. This demonization often stifles dialogue.
Without good dialogue, without people sitting at a table, how do we propose to get things done in an effective way?
People often choose to defer to trusted leaders, politicians, pundits, or influencers when forming beliefs. If a leader endorses a view, followers often accept it unquestioningly. Ask yourself why an even minded person would care what those in the arts, using their performances as a platform, would say about policy, or about whether our presidents should help a country in need or not, or if we should use tariffs to stabilize trade or not.
Yet, many of the people in this country will listen to these opinions and without following the facts, declare it law.
Then of course, there is Social Media and the Algorithmic Amplification process. Social media platforms amplify selective belief through algorithms that prioritize engaging content.
If a user likes anti-vaccine posts, they’ll see more, reinforcing that stance. This algorithmic loop narrows exposure to the facts, entrenching beliefs like vaccine skepticism despite medical consensus.
The same for issues such as Pro-life and Pro-choice. Would there ever be a need for opposite sides on the issue of saving a baby’s life?
Amazingly we have many Catholics who refuse to stand up and express what they really believe. It goes back to that thing I mentioned before about challenging group norms and risking exclusion. So, what if the people who voted for you believe in something else, vote where the power and comfort is. Yet so many of our elected officials hide when it comes time to protect a child and its mother.
Misinformation (unintentional falsehoods) and disinformation (deliberate lies) spread easily when they align with biases. In 2016, fake election stories went viral because they resonated with partisan audiences. People rarely fact-check claims that feel “right,” perpetuating false beliefs. Eroding trust in government, media, and academia pushes people toward alternative sources, often less reliable.
Selective belief has profound consequences for politics and society, undermining democracy and discourse. It also undermines a little thing called our moral values.
Democracy needs shared facts for debate and compromise.
When beliefs diverge, consensus fractures. Climate change becomes a cultural war rather than a scientific issue, as each side clings to its narrative, stalling constructive conversations and solutions. Selective belief deepens polarization, turning opponents into enemies. Polarization blocks compromise and escalates tensions. Nothing can be accomplished under these circumstances.
Believing what one wants to believe makes people susceptible to manipulation. Politicians exploit these emotions with simplistic narratives. The media feeds into these emotions.
Can we reverse this trend? I believe so. Education is essential, critical thinking like evaluating sources, recognizing biases helps people question assumptions. Understanding the Media teaches how to spot misinformation.
Encouraging intellectual humility fosters openness to opposing views. Dialogue between groups reduces polarization. Community forums where conservatives and liberals discuss issues like health care can humanize opponents, challenging biased beliefs through exposure of the facts.
We can demand that Tech platforms adjust algorithms to promote diverse or credible content. Fact-checking, though tricky, can counter misinformation. Balancing free speech with harm reduction is key to healthier information environments. Intelligent conversation at the negotiating table, and yes, the dining room table, is essential.
Most of all transparent, accountable institutions can restore trust. Governments admitting errors or engaging communities in policy decisions can rebuild the faith that has been lost. Consistent integrity over a period of time shifts the narrative. Since emotions drive belief, emotional awareness helps. Mindfulness or reflection cannot be revealed when feelings skew judgment.
In a divided world, pursuing the truth demands courage.
I remind everyone reading this article, that we are One Nation under God. I wonder what God would think of some of the decisions our politicians, Federal, State and our local representatives, have made. I am even more interested in what He thinks of those who ignore the truth and slant the facts to support their own narrative. I leave you this week with these very special passages.
“At this critical moment in history, the Lord needs men and women who know how to make good choices.” — St. Pope John Paul II.
“ For God will bring every deed into judgement, along with every hidden thing, whether good or bad.” — Ecclesiastes 12:14
My Brothers and Sisters, Peace until next week…
