You might think that whether people believe in climate change or the danger of Covid-19 ought to most closely track the strength of the evidence for those things. Depressingly, that isn’t always the case. Very often, people’s belief is tied to their political ideology.

There are good reasons why ideology influences belief in empirical claims. One reason is that we can’t all be experts on epidemiology or climate science. As a result, we need to rely upon the judgments of others.

Whose judgement do we rely upon when it comes to matters we aren’t experts in? Naturally, we turn to people we think we can trust, & naturally, we are more likely to trust people who share our values (we should trust expertise rather than values in these cases, but we don't).

If the people we think share our values have been captured or corrupted by vested interests, such as fossil fuel, the animal industry, or gun lobbies for example, then our trust ends up being misplaced. Bummer. This helps partly explain partisan beliefs on a range of issues.

The ideological connection with belief also means that if we want to persuade others on an issue like climate change then we might need to refer to values that don’t depend on our own ideology.

For example, if you want to persuade a Republican that we should move away from fossil fuels then you probably ought to connect fossil fuel dependency with a loss of freedom, higher taxes, religious faith etc.

If your argument for climate responsibility to a Republican relies upon them changing their entire ideological worldview to yours then it will probably fail to persuade them.

Where am I going with this? Well, veganism, that’s where. There’s a continual angry debate in vegan circles about whether veganising popular products (like Whoppers & Big Macs) is a good thing. Some argue that you have to be anti-capitalist to be vegan.

If you want to persuade a Conservative or Republican to go vegan, telling them that veganism has socialism or communism as a necessary condition is likely doomed to failure. You’ll get further if you show that veganism is compatible with their most deeply held commitments.

All of which brings me to this fascinating article: https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/articles/veganism/, kindly sent to me by @DrDavidSM. When I read it, I immediately thought about the literature connecting belief in climate change with ideology.

Arguing for veganism as a means to improve the fighting power of the military is very uncomfortable reading for most animal-rights advocates (myself included). So, I can imagine the reaction this article will provoke.

My current research project looks at how holding different values from the dominant social norm provokes hostility, particularly from conservatives. This is partly because of the values of conservatism themselves, & partly because of how identity & ideology are connected.

Deviant values are seen as a threat to society & community, so veganism ends up being seen as something that undermines social order. Hence, hostility towards it is stronger from right-wingers.

However, what the article connecting veganism & military might does is positively connect veganism, sustainability, & combatting climate change with national security & the American national interest. That’s a really clever way of reaching across the ideological divide.

Anyway, I found it fascinating enough to produce a ridiculously long tweet thread, for which I can only apologise. I should probably go back to blogging as Twitter really isn't the place for this.