The Political Brain is a groundbreaking investigation into the role of emotion in determining the political life of the nation. For two decades Drew Westen, professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University, has explored a theory of the mind that differs substantially from the more "dispassionate" notions held by most cognitive psychologists, political scientists, and economists—and Democratic campaign strategists. The idea of the mind as a cool calculator that makes decisions ... (show more)
The Political Brain is a groundbreaking investigation into the role of emotion in determining the political life of the nation. For two decades Drew Westen, professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University, has explored a theory of the mind that differs substantially from the more "dispassionate" notions held by most cognitive psychologists, political scientists, and economists—and Democratic campaign strategists. The idea of the mind as a cool calculator that makes decisions by weighing the evidence bears no relation to how the brain actually works. When political candidates assume voters dispassionately make decisions based on "the issues," they lose. That's why only one Democrat has been re-elected to the presidency since Franklin Roosevelt—and only one Republican has failed in that quest.
In politics, when reason and emotion collide, emotion invariably wins. Elections are decided in the marketplace of emotions, a marketplace filled with values, images, analogies, moral sentiments, and moving oratory, in which logic plays only a supporting role. Westen shows, through a whistle-stop journey through the evolution of the passionate brain and a bravura tour through fifty years of American presidential and national elections, why campaigns succeed and fail. The evidence is overwhelming that three things determine how people vote, in this order: their feelings toward the parties and their principles, their feelings toward the candidates, and, if they haven't decided by then, their feelings toward the candidates' policy positions.
Westen turns conventional political analyses on their head, suggesting that the question for Democratic politics isn't so much about moving to the right or the left but about moving the electorate. He shows how it can be done through examples of what candidates have said—or could have said—in debates, speeches, and ads. Westen's discoveries could utterly transform electoral arithmetic, showing how a different view of the mind and brain leads to a different way of talking with voters about issues that have tied the tongues of Democrats for much of forty years—such as abortion, guns, taxes, and race. You can't change the structure of the brain. But you can change the way you appeal to it. And here's how… (show less)
Photo Gallery
A very interesting examination of what determines an individual's political views, and what political parties, advocacy organizations, and other ve... (show more)
A very interesting examination of what determines an individual's political views, and what political parties, advocacy organizations, and other vested interests can do to influence those views. A bit esoteric, and probably only for the political junkie, but recommended nonetheless. (show less)
I bought this book thinking it would be a discourse on the effects of emotion in politics. That made up about ten percent of the book; the rest wa... (show more)
I bought this book thinking it would be a discourse on the effects of emotion in politics. That made up about ten percent of the book; the rest was a manifesto aimed towards the Democratic Party on how they can achieve victory over the "vile" Republicans. Westen made some critical errors in judgment and description on the topic of conservatism, and he built many straw men in order to advance his causes for Democrats. Don't buy this book expecting a scientific approach to political psychology, despite what the book's cover projects. (show less)
Too thorough for my patience, but I did get some important nuggets from it, like this summary of politics during my lifetime:
"For fifty years, from the early 1930s to the early 1980s, Congress was dominated by the New Deal ideology and coalition forged by Franklin Roosevelt. People who lived through the Great Depression and those who heard about it from their parents remembered well the ugly underbelly of unregulated capitalism. Even conservative presidents, such as Eisenhower and N... (show more)
Too thorough for my patience, but I did get some important nuggets from it, like this summary of politics during my lifetime:
"For fifty years, from the early 1930s to the early 1980s, Congress was dominated by the New Deal ideology and coalition forged by Franklin Roosevelt. People who lived through the Great Depression and those who heard about it from their parents remembered well the ugly underbelly of unregulated capitalism. Even conservative presidents, such as Eisenhower and Nixon, accepted the basic premise of Democratic ideology, that capitalism is a good thing but government must serve as a watchdog. Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, hardly the acts of a president and a party ideologically opposed to government intervention....
"By August 24, 1984, when Ronald Reagan accepted his party's nomination for a second term at the Republican Convention in Dallas, he had solidified a set of organizing principles that would galvanize the conservative movement for a generation.... In Reagan's hands, taxation became 'confiscation,' attenpts to solve social problems became 'costly social experiments,' regulation of market failures became 'economic tinkering.' Reagan was reshaping the language of public discourse about the nature and role of government as profoundly as had Roosevelt fifty years earlier."
Westen offers skillful position statements that the Democrats woulda, shoulda, coulda used, in the context of broad emotions that rule an electorate too busy and human to care much for logic. I appreciate the logical explanation of illogic. (show less)
Already read
Wow! The writer is so brilliant. This is a nice introduction in psychology, american politic and history, ... and is useful to anybody in these fields, but also in advertisement and writings. Even if it been written by a democrat that hates the last Bush to be POTUS, I now take Dubya more seriously, because even if he says just some pure nonsense babbling it uses emotion to connect with the electorate. And emotions are always stronger than facts (the great lesson of this book). Unfortunately,... (show more)
Wow! The writer is so brilliant. This is a nice introduction in psychology, american politic and history, ... and is useful to anybody in these fields, but also in advertisement and writings. Even if it been written by a democrat that hates the last Bush to be POTUS, I now take Dubya more seriously, because even if he says just some pure nonsense babbling it uses emotion to connect with the electorate. And emotions are always stronger than facts (the great lesson of this book). Unfortunately, there's too many If in this books, but support by facts that are always useful to know. (show less)
Already read
Please log in to join the conversation
Blah
After say the first 130 pages it starts to diverse into "Well if I were there...this is what I would have said" now granted the first 130 are enlightening as to where certain problems hit our brain and why we react to them the way we do. But after that it really isnt worth the read.
Alex Decker about 1 year agoThis book has been added to these lists:
LivingSocial.com is a social discovery and cataloging network that allows people to review and share their favorite movies, books, games, music, restaurants and beer
Add Bookmark
