Tuesday

What is Ultimate Attribution Error?

 Ultimate Attribution Error is a concept in social psychology that describes a bias people have when they explain the behavior of individuals from in-groups (the group they identify with) versus out-groups (other groups). It's an extension of the fundamental attribution error, but at a group level.

Summary:

The ultimate attribution error occurs when people attribute:

  • Negative behavior of out-group members to their character or disposition (e.g., "they're just bad people"), and

  • Negative behavior of in-group members to external or situational factors (e.g., "he was under a lot of stress").

Likewise, people often attribute:

  • Positive behavior of in-group members to their disposition (e.g., "she's smart"), but

  • Positive behavior of out-group members to luck or external factors (e.g., "he just got lucky").


Examples:

  1. Race or Ethnic Groups:

    • A white person sees a Black person succeed and says, "He probably got a handout or special treatment" (external), but if a white person succeeds, they say, "She worked hard and earned it" (internal).

    • If a member of a minority group commits a crime, someone might think, "That's just how they are" (internal), but if someone from their own group does, they might say, "He was in a bad situation" (external).

  2. Political Groups:

    • A Democrat might say, “That Republican lied because they’re corrupt” (internal), but if a Democrat lies, “They had to because of political pressure” (external).

    • Vice versa for Republicans viewing Democrats.

  3. National or Cultural Groups:

    • An American sees a foreigner being rude and thinks, "People from that country are just rude" (internal).

    • But if an American is rude abroad, they might say, "He was just having a bad day" (external).

Is this affected by idology?

The ultimate attribution error itself is a psychological bias that can affect anyone, regardless of political ideology—liberal or conservative. It’s a general human tendency to favor one’s in-group and judge out-groups more harshly. That said, there are some nuanced findings in psychology that can help explain how it might play out differently depending on a person’s political leanings.


Key Points:

  • Not inherently tied to conservatism or liberalism: Ultimate attribution error is about group identity and bias, not political orientation. Liberals and conservatives are both capable of this bias when thinking about "their side" vs. "the other side."

  • How it might appear more often in conservatives (in some studies):

    • Conservatives tend to score higher on measures of group loyalty, threat sensitivity, and preference for order and tradition.

    • These traits may make conservative individuals more prone to us-vs-them thinking, which could lead to more frequent or intense ultimate attribution errors when judging out-groups.

    • Example: Some research has found conservatives more likely to attribute poverty to laziness (internal trait), whereas liberals are more likely to cite systemic causes (external factors).

  • How it might show up in liberals:

    • Liberals may be more likely to show ultimate attribution error in the reverse when dealing with groups they feel strongly allied with (e.g., marginalized communities).

    • This can include over-attributing positive actions of minority groups to internal traits while downplaying negative behaviors as solely the result of external pressures.


TL;DR:

The ultimate attribution error is not exclusive to conservatives or liberals. It’s a human bias, but how and where it shows up might depend on the group a person identifies with or opposes. Conservatives might show it more in areas related to tradition, authority, or nationalism; liberals might show it more when defending disadvantaged or progressive groups.

Want a real-world political example broken down from both sides?

ChatGPT

What has changed politically, socially, and economically in Hungary since Victor Orban took office?

 According to ChatGPT:

Viktor Orbán has been Prime Minister of Hungary since 2010, leading the country under the Fidesz party. His long tenure has brought significant political, social, and economic changes. Here's a breakdown of what has changed and how freedom, quality of life, and public opinion have been affected.


🔹 Political Changes

Centralization of Power:

  • Orbán’s government has significantly centralized power. Constitutional changes and reforms have weakened checks and balances, including judicial independence and media freedom.

  • Electoral laws were modified in ways that benefit Fidesz, helping it maintain a supermajority in Parliament.

Media Control:

  • Many independent media outlets have been bought by pro-government allies or folded due to pressure. The media landscape is now heavily pro-government, limiting diverse viewpoints.

Civil Society & NGOs:

  • Orbán's government has cracked down on NGOs, especially those receiving foreign funding or involved in human rights or refugee advocacy. Legislation has made it harder for them to operate.

Relations with the EU:

  • Hungary has clashed with the EU over rule of law issues, migration policy, and corruption. Some EU funds have been frozen due to concerns over democratic backsliding.

Freedom Score: According to organizations like Freedom House, Hungary has shifted from a “consolidated democracy” to a “hybrid regime”—a mix of democratic and autocratic features.

➡️ Are people more or less free?

  • Less free politically and in terms of civil liberties, especially regarding press, judiciary, and dissenting voices.


🔹 Social Changes

National Identity & Migration:

  • Orbán has emphasized nationalism, Christianity, and traditional family values.

  • His government is strongly anti-immigration and has run controversial campaigns against the EU and figures like George Soros.

Education and Culture:

  • Universities and cultural institutions have been brought under greater state control.

  • The government promotes a nationalist interpretation of history and culture.

LGBTQ+ Rights:

  • Rights for LGBTQ+ individuals have been restricted. For example, a law was passed banning the depiction of LGBTQ+ content to minors, similar to Russia’s “gay propaganda” law.

➡️ Social atmosphere:

  • More controlled, with growing intolerance toward marginalized groups and less space for progressive or liberal movements.


🔹 Economic Changes

Growth & Investment:

  • Hungary has seen decent economic growth, low unemployment, and increased foreign investment, especially from China and Russia.

  • Orbán’s government emphasizes low corporate taxes, making Hungary attractive to multinationals like BMW and Samsung.

Wages and Cost of Living:

  • Wages have risen, but so have prices, especially for housing.

  • Inflation and housing costs have been significant issues, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

Corruption:

  • High levels of corruption are reported, especially in the use of EU funds. The perception is that political allies and family members of Orbán have become very wealthy.

➡️ Has quality of life improved?

  • Mixed: Material conditions (jobs, wages) have improved for many, but inequality, corruption, and housing affordability remain problems.


🔹 What Do Orbán's Supporters Think?

Supporters tend to believe:

  • He restored national pride and sovereignty.

  • Hungary is safer and more stable under his leadership.

  • Economic growth and job creation are signs of good governance.

  • He's standing up to global elites, the EU, and progressive ideology.

  • Traditional values and national identity are protected.

Support base:

  • Strong in rural areas and among older, conservative voters.

  • State media reinforces positive narratives about his leadership.


🔹 Summary: Is Hungary Better or Worse Off?

AspectDirection of Change
Political Freedom↓ Less free
Media & Civil Society↓ Less independent
Social Tolerance↓ More restrictive
Economy & Jobs↑ Improved (mostly)
Inequality & Corruption↔/↑ Ongoing problems
Public Sentiment↔ Divided

If you're curious, I can also show how Hungary compares to its neighbors, or how Orbán's Hungary is perceived in international politics. Would that be helpful?

Thursday

"Money, Lies, and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy," author Katherine Stewart

Chat GPT ​Summary: In "Money, Lies, and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy," author Katherine Stewart explores a coordinated effort among various right-wing factions aiming to undermine American democracy. Published in February 2025, the book delves into the alliances formed between Christian nationalists, billionaire donors, and conservative ideologues within the Republican Party.Wikipedia+5NewPages.com+5The Guardian+5Ms. Magazine+3The Guardian+3Wikipedia+3

Stewart identifies three primary components driving this movement:The Guardian

  1. Wealth: The infusion of substantial financial resources from ultra-wealthy donors destabilizes the political system by promoting deregulation, tax cuts for the affluent, and policies that erode labor protections.BookBrowse.com+2Wikipedia+2The Guardian+2

  2. Disinformation: The strategic dissemination of false information serves to divide the populace and advance an undemocratic agenda.

  3. Christian Nationalism: Religious rhetoric is employed to mobilize working-class voters, promoting the belief that governance should be exclusively in the hands of white, male, conservative Christians, while others are expected to comply.Wikipedia

Five Groups

The book categorizes the movement's participants into five groups:BookBrowse.com

Stewart emphasizes that the funder class is religiously diverse, encompassing not only evangelicals but also Catholics, Jews, and atheists.The Guardian+5Wikipedia+5Ms. Magazine+5

Throughout her investigation, Stewart highlights the movement's exploitation of contemporary issues such as immigration, gender roles, and economic anxiety to further its objectives. She underscores the strategic and well-organized nature of these efforts, contrasting them with the less coordinated pro-democracy forces.The Santa Barbara Independent+1The Guardian+1The Guardian+1Ms. Magazine+1

Despite the alarming findings, Stewart offers a message of hope, urging pro-democracy advocates to organize and strategize effectively in response. She believes that a majority of Americans support democratic principles over authoritarianism and emphasizes the need for persistent effort to protect democracy.The Guardian

"Money, Lies, and God" has received critical acclaim for its thorough research and compelling narrative. Publishers Weekly describes it as "an urgently needed background on the 2024 election results," while Kirkus Reviews calls it "an impassioned takedown of a 'militant minority.'"NewPages.com+2Wikipedia+2BookBrowse.com+2BookBrowse.com+1Wikipedia+1

Overall, the book serves as a clarion call to recognize and counteract the forces threatening American democracy.

Related: Reactionary nihilism’: how a rightwing movement strives to end US democracy - The Guardian

ChatGPT

Donald Trump and Right Wing Authoritarian Followers

The late social scientist Robert Altermyer wrote a book called The Authoritarians . In it he describes "social dominators" and sep...