Politics, Religion, and Cognitive Dissonance
Over the weekend, I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine regarding a foundational psychological principal and politics. In fact, it was so interesting, that I had to jump on the blog, first thing this morning, to write a little about it and see what others think.
If you are a regular visitor to The Mental Breakdown, you know that there are a few topics that we only address peripherally; religion and politics. As a psychologist, I am very cognizant that we all have our own views of these things and who am I (or anyone else) to tell you that what you believe is right or wrong?!? As long as you are not hurting anyone, believe what you will. And as long as I am allowed to vote for my representatives in a way that I feel best for my interests, you can do the same. As such, before you read any further, understand that this question is purely scientific and not an opinion about particular religious or political beliefs.
This current election cycle has brought up a very interesting observation that I am still trying to wrap my brain around. And while this discussion is not meant to serve as neither an endorsement nor a censure for any of particular candidate, it is interesting to me how particular candidates negotiate (mentally and emotionally) the disparity between what they say and the eventual outcome.
The main issue is this – several presidential candidates have claimed that their candidacy for president was “God-driven.” Rick Santorum and his wife told news sources that they believed that his candidacy was “what God wants.” Rick Perry and his wife (who likened her husband’s decision to run for president to Moses’ burning bush) informed reporters that “this is what he was called (by God) to do.” Scott Walker is quoted as saying, “This is God’s plan for me and I am humbled to be a candidate for President of the United States.”
While there are others, I use these three candidates as examples because all three of them, as of the time of this blog post, have dropped out of the presidential race. So, the big question(s), is this, “How do candidates rationalize these beliefs – that they are “called by God” to serve as president – while another candidate, often standing right next to him, claims the same divine inspiration? And perhaps as important, how do these candidates – and their supporters – manage the shift when the votes (and money) are not enough for them to continue their bid?
When I wear my “Psychologist’s Hat,” I can see two possible explanations. The first is, of course, that the candidates completely believe what they are saying. Perhaps they have the impression that the candidates who are making the same claim of divine calling are either charlatans or simply (and perhaps more politely) misguided. The second – and understandably more cynical – is that these politicians are saying what they feel they must say to form a base – a committed foundation of supporters who will stick with them and help them through to the end.
While both possible explanations have their respective issues, I am interested in the cognitive dissonance that is involved in this phenomenon. I will write a blog post specific to cognitive dissonance tomorrow, but in the meantime let me ask you this – How do you rationalize this observation? How do you explain the disparity between their claims of divine calling with their ultimate withdrawal?
This topic is so interesting that Dr. Richard and I plan to tackle the issue on Friday 2.19.16 on The Mental Breakdown podcast, which will broadcast live at 8:00 am on Mixlr. Click here if you would like to listen in live and chat with us on the message board as we broadcast. If you can’t listen live, send in your questions or comments on this blog post (https://thementalbreakdown.com/politicsreligionandcognitivedissonance/) and we will address them on the show. You will also be able to download the finished podcast from iTunes or listen here on our site.
Dr. Berney administrator
About the author