CDZ The Surprising Psychology of January 6

Mac1958

Diamond Member
Dec 8, 2011
115,325
90,225
3,635
Opposing Authoritarian Ideological Fundamentalism.
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

I was wondering how long it was going to take the OP to get back to his "poor oppressed White People" schtick.

The problem with this argument, that Democrats make every few years, is that you can't reach out to these people. Their oblivious. They've been so engrained in their racism that they will vote against their own economic interests and they have been doing so since Tricky Dick.

The Democrats have not won a majority of White People since 1964, and that was only because the Republicans nominated a madman. Since then, we've seen the repeated Cycle. White people vote for a Republican because those darkies are getting too uppity. The Republicans then proceed to wreck the middle class to benefit the investor class. Just enough white people vote for a Democrat next time to fix things. (Obama, Clinton) When things are going relatively well, the Republicans come back and play on those racial fears again and get back into office and do the exact same thing.

Experience SHOULD be a great teacher, but it isn't. No matter how many times the Republicans wreck the economy to benefit the Investor Class (it's a design feature, not a bug) the white working class will keep voting for them because their racism overpowers their economic self-interest.

It's uniquely American. It's why so many Southerners who didn't own slaves happily went out and died for the Confederacy because the thought of a black man being an equal horrified them. This is nothing new, and frankly, the Democrats need to stop trying to coddle it.
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.



Pape is a hack whose research is faulty. Probably a Democrat.



.
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.



Pape is a hack whose research is faulty. Probably a Democrat.



.

I know, I know: Fake news.
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.



Pape is a hack whose research is faulty. Probably a Democrat.



.

I know, I know: Fake news.


Read the scholarly critics by professors of his earlier work. I provided the links.

.
 
Trumpism is very much about maintaining and strengthening every unfair advantage white people have left. They being vengeful minded are certain all the people that got officially treated like garbage for 250 years are out for some payback.
 
We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

This, more than anything else.

I recall when Ron Paul was universally lambasted in the 2008 Republican primaries for making this point regarding the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. The populists and the demagogues, braying jackasses all, accused him of "sympathizing" with the terrorists. They were actively, and adamantly, opposed to any efforts to understand the motivations of the terrorists.

And now liberals are saying we should dismiss the concerns of Trump supporters in exactly the same way:

The problem with this argument, that Democrats make every few years, is that you can't reach out to these people. Their oblivious. They've been so engrained in their racism that they will vote against their own economic interests and they have been doing so since Tricky Dick.

"Republicans are racist, mkay?"
 
We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

This, more than anything else.

I recall when Ron Paul was universally lambasted in the 2008 Republican primaries for making this point regarding the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. The populists and the demagogues, braying jackasses all, accused him of "sympathizing" with the terrorists. They were actively, and adamantly, opposed to any efforts to understand the motivations of the terrorists.
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to accurately understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.

We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse. What I don't understand is how we don't see this.
 
We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

This, more than anything else.

I recall when Ron Paul was universally lambasted in the 2008 Republican primaries for making this point regarding the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. The populists and the demagogues, braying jackasses all, accused him of "sympathizing" with the terrorists. They were actively, and adamantly, opposed to any efforts to understand the motivations of the terrorists.
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.

We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse.
Acting like their arguments have merit does not do anything positive. At some point you have to draw a line and do nothing further to validate views that cannot be allowed to become mainstream.
 
We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

This, more than anything else.

I recall when Ron Paul was universally lambasted in the 2008 Republican primaries for making this point regarding the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. The populists and the demagogues, braying jackasses all, accused him of "sympathizing" with the terrorists. They were actively, and adamantly, opposed to any efforts to understand the motivations of the terrorists.
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.

We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse.
Acting like their arguments have merit does not do anything positive. At some point you have to draw a line and do nothing further to validate views that cannot be allowed to become mainstream.
Well, that's not the way my little brain works. There is a difference to me between understanding a motivation and validating it. If we can't understand the other person's perspective (whether we agree with it or not), there is no way to communicate effectively with them. If we can't communicate, we can't even begin to address problems effectively. Then we're just reduced to trying to "beat" them.
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.


I think he was on Smerconish.... If I remember correctly, something like 25% was the % of arrested insurrectionists who actually voted in the election. The vast majority were just looking for a fight.
 
We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse. What I don't understand is how we don't see this.

And painting with a broad brush only reinforces the problem. Obviously many Republicans are racists. Many are simply out to protect "white privilege". But many aren't. Many have valid concerns and reasonable complaints about the direction our country is taking. Ignoring their concerns, and focusing solely on the deplorable aspects of Trump's support, actually "feeds the trolls". It pushes otherwise reasonable Republicans to "pick sides" and support people and causes they'd ordinarly reject.

If, instead, Democrats re-tooled their agenda to actually take some of the concerns of rural Republicans seriously, they could pull the rug out from underneath Trump's populism and break his stranglehold on the Republican party. They'd be doing all of us a favor if they did. But sadly, they don't seem interested. They're busy licking their chops at the thought of single-party rule, fantasizing about eliminating the Republican party instead of attending to the needs of the nation.
 
Last edited:
We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.

This, more than anything else.

I recall when Ron Paul was universally lambasted in the 2008 Republican primaries for making this point regarding the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. The populists and the demagogues, braying jackasses all, accused him of "sympathizing" with the terrorists. They were actively, and adamantly, opposed to any efforts to understand the motivations of the terrorists.
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.

We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse.
Acting like their arguments have merit does not do anything positive. At some point you have to draw a line and do nothing further to validate views that cannot be allowed to become mainstream.
Well, that's not the way my little brain works. There is a difference to me between understanding a motivation and validating it. If we can't understand the other person's perspective (whether we agree with it or not), there is no way to communicate effectively with them. If we can't communicate, we can't even begin to address problems effectively. Then we're just reduced to trying to "beat" them.
I understand them very well. I grew up in Alabama during desegregation and my older male relatives were in the Klan. Sometimes it's like I am an ex-cult member. Understanding their irrational fears is one thing but I will never act like they are justified. They must never be treated as anything other than the fringe no matter how many fall for this recycled Dixiecrat bullshit.
 
If I remember correctly, something like 25% was the % of arrested insurrectionists who actually voted in the election. The vast majority were just looking for a fight.
Yep, another byproduct of our antiquated election process. With gerrymandering and the two-party nonsense, and the general dysfunction of winner-take-all, plurality voting, many of us live in areas where there's not much point in voting - where the results are a foregone conclusion and our voices will never be heard. Unless we yell, very loudly.
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.



Yeha... I call bullshit.
"Study".... interviewing a dozen people is not exactly a "study".
"Deep diving" is not looking at one sheet of paper, taking 5 minutes to add up the dozen numbers and calling it an "extensive study".... :D

I swear, you are getting worse by the day.
Funny stuff
 
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to accurately understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.
I absolutely agree.
We don't necessarily have to agree with a particular motivation, but ignoring, distorting it or dismissing it just makes matters worse. What I don't understand is how we don't see this.
But... You do it yourself...?
 
The reactions (believed to be responses) shows three (3) things-

1) people are stupid who don't realize knowledge isn't biased in its origin
2) reacting is not the same as responding
3) see number 1
 
This is absolutely fascinating. This guy and his team have taken a deep dive into the demographics, psychology and motivations of the January 6th attack. They've done a study based on direct, personal interviews with most of the people who were arrested. They did three separate studies and then combined the findings.

Some of the most interesting conclusions of the study:
  • The demographics where unique: Unlike most riots, the general demographics were white males, lower 40's, with jobs (many of them professionals). Not a big surprise there, but the motivations they had were not what I expected.
  • The main driver of this was not "The Steal": You'd think the biggest driver, the biggest motivating factor, was the "rigged election". It was not. The most consistent motivating fact was "the fear of the Great Replacement", the fear that (as he puts it) the rights of Hispanics and Blacks are outpacing the rights of whites. The "rigged election" thing was surely an issue they cared about, but it was NOT number one.
  • Where they live mattered: Most of them live in counties that (a) Biden won, the bluest parts of the country, and (b) the biggest factor was the percentage of decline in white population in their county. The more red, rural areas were less represented per capita!
This guy is very clear, fair and specific. And he points out something terribly important: We must listen to and understand the motivations of people who we disagree with before we can fix anything. Gee. What a novel idea.



Pape is a hack whose research is faulty. Probably a Democrat.



.

I know, I know: Fake news.

exactly
 
I myself neither identify with either party nor do I support the wealthy based on the fact that those in power are the ones responsible for the war on Americans..
 
A critical element in this tribal environment is that neither tribe makes an effort to accurately understand the perspectives, motivations, experiences and priorities of the other. All that leads to is an expanding tribalism, as we're seeing.

Not at all. I understand it perfectly. I just reject it. Many of the people I grew up with are Trump Cultists.

It's just you can't keep pandering to them, hoping to win their votes. It's just not productive. The biggest problem is Democrats keep doing half measures in implementing their agenda following exactly this kind of idiotic advice. It's how we ended up with ObamaCare being just warmed over RomneyCare instead of the Single Payer System progressive wanted that would have actually solved the problem.
 

Forum List

Back
Top