WUWT reader “Carl” Submits this story:
New research suggests people tend to hold negative views of political and social activists
Why don’t people behave in more environmentally friendly ways? New research presents one uncomfortable answer: They don’t want to be associated with environmentalists.
That’s the conclusion of troubling new research from Canada, which similarly finds support for feminist goals is hampered by a dislike of feminists.
Participants held strongly negative stereotypes about such activists, and those feelings reduced their willingness “to adopt the behaviors that these activities promoted,” reports a research team led by University of Toronto psychologist Nadia Bashir. This surprisingly cruel caricaturing, the researchers conclude, plays “a key role in creating resistance to social change.”
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/26/study_everyone_hates_environmentalists_and_feminists_partner/
[I dub it the “Gleick effect”. – Anthony]
UPDATE: Pamela Gray in comments provides the abstract:
Klipstein said: “Many people who consider thermselves progressives want fair wages, equal rights, businesses to play fair, no pollution, and government to stay out of their bedrooms. Nowhere near all of them want a big, controlling government.”
Who determines what fair wages are and how?
Equal OPPORTUNITY should be the goal. Too many people think equal rights apply to that which should be earned.
Businesses to play fair – as long as they ar allowed to make a fair profit, too?
“No pollution” is absurd unless you are willing to forgo ever using the bathroom again. Acceptable remediation of harmful pollution based on cost-benefit studies is the best we can do.
“government to stay out of their bedrooms,” even if participants are minors, cause harm to each other, or present health risks to society?
Those issues are not as simplistic as presented. The question is where do you draw the line between a government powerful enough to protect the individual yet not powerful enough to control him.
Some Small Minded Jerk said: “its pretty easy to see that environmentalism & Feminism are both hate based movements,, Ugly small minded jerks who think their ability to clear a room somehow makes them right.”
It is hard to understand how these groups are “hate” groups. When I think of hate groups, it’s the KKK and Nazis and skin heads, groups that for all intents and purpose have no positive role in society other than hate. What with the air and water being cleaner and women not being the property of their husbands, we could use more groups like environmentalists and feminists.
But you might not think so.
Makes perfect sense to me. People can smell sanctimony and priggishness a mile off. They don’t like being lectured, or being cast as a backer of those who lecture. The wider the value/policy gap between activist and audience, the more turned-off the audience will be by a given level of stridency. Because activists are by definition people who have abandoned an ordinary life and a receptivity to new information in order to lecture others all day long, they tend to get more strident, not less.
Plus if there is a bad change in the underlying facts or benefits for their sales pitch, the audience will be less willing to listen.
So these factors can compound one another. Fun to watch the activists struggle and turn off the prospects and, maybe, disappoint their donors. Pass the popcorn, please.
Prince Charles yesterday [2010] urged the world to follow Islamic ‘spiritual principles’ in order to protect the environment.
If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.
— Prince Phillip, World Wildlife Fund
Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?
— Maurice Strong, U.N. environmental leader and IPCC creator
Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.
— Dave Forman (founder of Earth First!)
What’s not to love about people who want to destroy civilization and/or wipe out an entire species (the human race) in the name of the environment? Hanging out with would-be mass murderers and hypocrites who would like very much to destroy my life or my way of life just doesn’t appeal to me for some reason. Go figure.
Pippen Kool:
You say in your post at September 29, 2013 at 12:36 pm
Strange. I did think so. Then you said it, and I know your record of ‘accuracy’ in your assertions. So, now I doubt it.
Richard
There are those who are screechy and preachy and don’t care about anything but the specific activism of the moment. Or go into their ivory tower think-tanks and issue proclamations from the oracle.
The poverty pimps who would not look at a homeless person or directly help a poor person that asked but campaigns for subsidies would be an example. There is such a thing as “moral authority”
Blessed Mother Theresa of Calcutta was definitely an activist, but one you could respect since she lived out what she was preaching. Willis Eschenbach here helps directly and on the ground.
Too many want a 1-click fix to the problems. But I think people realize that it doesn’t and can’t work. The issues are complex enough that they don’t fit into a sound bite or elevator speech, but that is all activists have – “help the cause or we’ll all die” is how they must summarize it.
Even the longer forms like the Al Gore movie have forgotten how to persuasively argue. Yet panic only works in a crowded theater with locked doors. Given time to think or even ask questions – then they must provide answers. Instead they respond with insults, evasions, or nonsense.
Yet the conscience still exists and people know in their hearts there is something wrong when answers aren’t given, rhetoric is toward fear instead of reason, and such.
The activists have been crying “wolf” for years, yet there never is a wolf, only a big expensive wolf study and prevention non or actual government organization that studies, regulates, and otherwise seems to be more interested in perpetuating itself on whatever issue is at hand.
Conversely there are people actually fixing problems (the group bringing clean water or the herds of ruminants that restore grasslands).
It may help also that they’ve destroyed the economy so there isn’t any surplus left from the ordinary middle class contributors.
I think Pamela nailed the research early in the comments.
Still; keep moving, don’t make eye contact, mouth absurdities, cram a dollar into the can or drop some change and escape.
I am a naturalist and have been since the sixties. Only I find a lot of extremists with minimal knowledge of nature they’re ranting about.
I also tear up the bulk business mail from the eco-nuts. Which is a lot nicer I guess than using their pre-paid mailers and sending them back sheet lead. (Receiving Post Offices often weigh the entire load and divide by the average piece weight to determine charges. Unfortunately, they tend to tear the envelopes off of cinder blocks or bricks so the receiving group doesn’t pay for the masonry. Pity.
In the USA, if one really wants to donate to wilderness stuff, buy a hunting license, fishing license, duck stamps (at your local Post Office), ammunition or gear.
Dingell-Johnson Act or Wallop-Breaux Act
Pittman-Robertson Act.
Duck Stamp Act
Duck Stamp Revenues for 2011-2012 (easier to find current amounts) is
$1,517,647
Duck Stamp revenues have been declining.
All of these tax situations were initiated by sportsmen and sportswomen and actively supported over the years. These same people have actively defended the collected funds from government entities trying to snip the funds for their own usages, known as money government black holes.
Most of the collected funds are destined for wildlife and not for ‘administration’. Sadly, when the eco-nutty send out flyers about how much money was spent for specific wildlife, a little investigating often reveals that the funds actually spent for the wildlife are funds from the “Wildlife Restoration Acts” and not directly from the eco-batty treasure chests. Because any field wildlife restoration must be permitted through and coordinated the Federal or State FWS agencies. Somehow, the totals spent by the State and Federal agencies are included in eco-propaganda blurbs about money spent for wildlife.
If it is in the U.S. wild and it affects or interacts with wildlife, usually on Federal or State property (but not always); then at least some of the funds likely came from the taxes described above.
PS Eco-terrors hate to have this shown to them. In their minds, nature recovered by their self imposed deprivations, not because some hunter or fisherperson.
One year, about 1989, I participated in a swamp restoration effort south of New Orleans. The effort involved collecting, transporting and anchoring post xmas Christmas trees into swamp outlets to help cause the outgoing water to drop silt. Anchoring meant that a bunch of us nutty outdoorsmen, (no foolish ladies that day), strung chicken wiring fencing from post to post across outlets. All of us actually in the water wore chest waders, except for the Coastguard worker helping us. He wore a Navy neoprene dive suit.
Men in the one flat boat would hammer in the posts that we tried to hold steady. When a post was hammered in, that was what we held onto so our chest waders stayed above water while we strung the fence, wired the fence to the post and then wired the trees to the fence.
When water slops over the top of the chest waders, (mine leaked anyway) cold water would trickle around warm body parts. And we would envy the Coastguard guy for his neoprene suit. Only, if one can keep too much cold water from circulating around one’s privates, the body warms the water and it isn’t too uncomfortable; till the next dollop of cold water joins the fun.
Then at some point in the afternoon, the Coastguard man was shivering hard and asked to be relieved. Men in the flat boat had to pull him in and help him back to their mother ship.
I’ve never wanted a neoprene anything since then; not when leaky waders in over their depth trump.
There wasn’t one activist in that volunteer group, hunters and fishermen all. Which is pretty much a norm for the really grotty jobs or restoration activities.
On a more recent streambank improvement activity coordinated by the trout groups, there were several active activists. By which, I mean that they worked hard, got in the water and suffered with us. There were a number of other activists present; they made good if reluctant litter picker uppers, sort of.
A big difference between projects? Some, mostly the latter project was an easy drive and short walk for people in city shoes. The swamp project required a boat ride in the bottom of a flat boat, and slog across swamp in at least hip waders. Did I forget to mention the gators?
Opinion, (even if I plagiarized Pamela’s), rant and story… 🙂
Pippen,
The climate alarmist clique has plenty of members who routinely call for the firing, and for the incarceration, and even for the outright murder of scientific skeptics who even question their demonization of “carbon”.
But I have yet to see a scientific skeptic call for the murder, or firing, etc., of those who do not agree with them.
Thus, by your own criteria, you are part and parcel of a hate group. You are their enabler.
I would love to see you overcome your hatred, but in most cases that seems to be impossible. In your case, you could start by loudly condemning the climate alarmist cult in the same terms you condemn the KKK [a Democrat organization], the Nazis [a Socialist organization], and ‘skin heads’ [a Brit Leftist-controlled confederation of unemployed haters].
Stopping the hatred starts with you.
You’re right, I don’t think so.
The current eco-activists have nothing to do with the water quality; unless you think 1.8gpm showers and fail to flush toilets make for cleaner water. Clean water laws came well before the rise of big eco-green seeking endless funds for misuse.
The current troupe of feminists have nothing to do with woman’s equality to men, getting the vote or whatever.
Do the women in your life insist on equal and fair treatment? Respect? Is every one of them a dyed in the wool activist feminist? I doubt it, insisting on fair treatment is the right of every American. Insisting on fair treatment does not make one an activist, it does make them American.
The first sentence of the abstract says, “Despite recognizing the need for social change in …” The abstract does not say, “Despite believing …” it uses the word recognizing. Therefore I refuse to recognize anything the authors say as having validity. If they bring their political beliefs into the first sentence of the abstract (that there is a need for social change in …) then I have no way to know how they have distorted everything else in their paper. This is how I treat all papers now; when authors show their prejudices or lack of objectivity in the title, abstract or first paragraph I refuse to read further.
The alarmists and other social activists just can’t grasp the idea that people are sick of being shouted at by condescending holier-than-thou types. Debate just doesn’t feature, either, because their “ideals” are built on air. So they have to bully – they’ve got nothing else. And. People. Are. Sick. Of. It.
Humanist / Humanism works sufficiently and necessarily for me. If you are human I think you should have equal human rights; anywhere on earth or in space.
Although I am not an activist for humanism, I am not put off in any way by the most obnoxious / strident of humanist activists. No negative stereotyping by me in that regards.
However, I draw a line in the intellectual sand that humanist activists shall not cross. A humanist activist shall not harm any human’s rights in pursuit of humanism.
John
Seeing as the thread has went to hell and gone.
I’ll post the results from Woodbine racetrack:
1 1/16 Miles | 3 Year Olds And Up | CLAIMING ( $10,000 – $9,500 ) | Open
3 Sir McIntyre P. Husbands $9.00 $4.90 $3.60
7 Get A Grip (IRE) D. Moran $5.60 $4.50
8 Smooth Charlie S. Chernetz $4.10
==============
That was race #5 today, easy money.
Advocacy used to be civilized, constructive, and useful. Today, almost all advocacy boils down to one interest attempting to impose (usually by force of law) their will upon others (including those with differing viewpoints).
I dislike most activists for the simple reason they almost always want to impose their agenda on me.
I have strong feelings about many things. But I don’t go around seeking to impose them on others. Therefore, I do not consider myself an activist or advocate.
We are all so wrapped up in these polarized debates (left .v. right, pro-choice .v. pro-life, affirmative action .v. color blind etc.) that we seem to have forgotten that personal freedom to choose is something worth fighting for.
Human nature hasn’t changed in ten thousand years, and it never will. Live with it and stop constantly pestering us to conform to the socialist model. History proves socialism is unsustainable and always fails.
The use of lofty endeavors such as environmentalism to trick people into believing everything on the socialist plate is sinister. It’s not difficult to see a carbon dioxide tax is not beneficial to the individual, is ultimately harmful to society, and accomplishes nothing except for the wealthy elite to have people control. I don’t want the wealthy elite to have people control.
Imagine if all the people of the Earth believed the climate of our planet is not our fault?
[Rather, “not everything on the socialist plate” ? Mod]
Lilith says:
September 29, 2013 at 8:59 am
“For me it is the Monbiot effect. Drove me here with all his sneering at sceptics when I was simply trying to find out what the “settled science” was.”
Don’t forget he’s a believer in the God Of The Soil.
http://www.monbiot.com/2005/03/22/god-of-the-soil/
Pippen Kool says:
September 29, 2013 at 12:36 pm
“What with the air and water being cleaner and women not being the property of their husbands, we could use more groups like environmentalists and feminists.”
They are controlled opposition and get created by the governments as needed.
Could it be that these results are just as E.T. Jaynes might have predicted them, applying his evaluation of ‘Converging and diverging views’ of ‘Queer uses for probability theory’, Section 5.3 of Probability Theory: The Logic of Science?
“Not only in political speeches and news reporting, but wherever we seek for information on political matters, we run up against this same obstacle; we cannot trust anyone to tell us the truth, because we perceive that everyone who wants to talk about it is motivated either by self-interest or by ideology. In political matters, whatever the source of information, our prior probability for deception is always very high. However, it is not obvious whether this alone can prevent us from coming to agreement.”
“The initial portion of section 5.3 is reproduced below.”
http://www.variousconsequences.com/2009/11/converging-and-diverging-views.html
Greg says: September 29, 2013 at 10:32 am “I’m not sure what a “Mechanical Turk” is but I would bet it’s not a recognised unbiased selector. ”
“The Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is a crowdsourcing Internet marketplace that enables individuals or businesses (known as Requesters) to co-ordinate the use of human intelligence to perform tasks that computers are currently unable to do. It is one of the sites of Amazon Web Services. The Requesters are able to post tasks known as HITs (Human Intelligence Tasks), such as choosing the best among several photographs of a store-front, writing product descriptions, or identifying performers on music CDs. Workers (called Providers in Mechanical Turk’s Terms of Service, or, more colloquially, Turkers) can then browse among existing tasks and complete them for a monetary payment set by the Requester. To place HITs, the requesting programs use an open Application Programming Interface, or the more limited MTurk Requester site. Requesters are restricted to US-based entities. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Mechanical_Turk)
Activists of any type or noisy opinionated blowhards who really DON’T know how to make friends and influence people. Activists have 3 distinct characteristics.
1. They base their arguments on emotion. The whales are dying, It is for the children etc etc. Their opinions on how to fix a problem are never fact based and the long term response is that never actually fix anything.
2. They are control freaks. This comes out of using emotion as their initial argument. People are manipulated easier when emotional rhetoric is used. This is how cults are born. Activism is actually another form of cultism.
3. They have a messiah complex i.e. they believe they are doing something good by saving something even at a cost of killing something else.
How do you fight these type of people. Very difficult since they believe that they alone are right and every other bastard is wrong.
I knew a man known only as Big Demo. He used to burst into my local pub almost every saturday lunchtime shouting ‘big demo in London today, march against nuclear submarines, big demo, big demo’. I saw him on the TV a few weeks ago at the anti-fracking campaign in Balcombe, West Sussex screaming ‘no justice’ over and over again at some patient copper.
So Big Demo is still alive and kicking. Only the target of his deep-seated hate and rage has changed. And I still don’t know his real name. Just a small angry man, Big Demo.
@Richardscourtney
No mate, personal research only.
@Greg
Lighten up sweetheart, some of us see a funny side.
Furthermore, keep your fantasies about my fantasies to yourself. I was actually thinking about not shaving legs. Perhaps you’re projecting?
Should I check with you prior to posting comments comrade?
So let’s see if I understand this. People that witness criticism, founded our not, of received knowledge are prone to have less belief in the received knowledge? Sounds like their ought to be a law against challenging the testimonies clerics and experts.
One more time and so relevant: “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” — Richard Feynman
Actions speak louder than words.
What people are reacting against is the “extremist” or “true believer” mentality and behavior pattern. I suspect one can find checklists of their characteristics online if one googles for them.