{"id":168648,"date":"2026-02-08T09:50:18","date_gmt":"2026-02-08T17:50:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=168648"},"modified":"2026-02-08T11:45:39","modified_gmt":"2026-02-08T19:45:39","slug":"a-philosopher-discovery-ideology-isnt-about-ideas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=168648","title":{"rendered":"A Philosopher Discovers Ideology Isn’t About Ideas"},"content":{"rendered":"

Michael Huemer would benefit from learning Alliance Theory<\/a>.<\/p>\n

He writes today<\/a>: <\/p>\n

When I first encountered ideologies and religions, I took them at face value, as attempts to understand the world. I assumed that people sincerely believed them and would use them to infer further consequences\u2014or, in the event that they couldn\u2019t accept a consequence, would admit that they were wrong and change their ideology. I tried to evaluate ideologies based on evidence and correspondence with reality, which I assumed was what one was supposed to do.<\/p>\n

Over a period of years, I realized that, for the rest of the world, it wasn\u2019t really about ideas and understanding the world.<\/p>\n

1. How Can Ideology Not Be About Ideas?
\nWait, an ideology is a certain kind of system of ideas. How could it \u201cnot be about ideas\u201d? What I mean is that<\/p>\n

a. The reasons people choose an ideology are extraneous to the intellectual characteristics of the ideology (the arguments, the evidence, the explanatory virtues) and more to do with arbitrary extrinsic characteristics, like who else holds that ideology, or what vague emotional associations it carries.<\/p>\n

b. Most people don\u2019t take the contents of their ideology all that seriously\u2014they don\u2019t actually use it to understand the real world. It\u2019s mostly something to say, and to berate other people for not saying. They use ideological debate as a proxy for tribal contests. They don\u2019t support group G because of idea I; they support I because it\u2019s the idea associated with G.<\/p>\n

I observed in an earlier post (\u201cDo Religious People Believe Religion?\u201d), that people who profess some religion often don\u2019t appear to take the major tenets of that religion seriously. Many self-described Christians fail to attend church, or read the Bible, or follow its teachings. Few of them really turn the other cheek, nor do they seem to eagerly anticipate death (as one should if one expects to go to heaven).<\/p>\n

Many people are like that about politics too. E.g., people who said the Covid lockdowns were essential, but then they went out to big gatherings. Or people who say the elections are rigged, but they still go to vote.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

ChatGPT says: Alliance Theory<\/a> is the missing spine in Huemer\u2019s account. He\u2019s seeing real phenomena, but he\u2019s explaining them with personality, genes, and \u201ctribalism\u201d where the deeper driver is coalition maintenance.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the Alliance Theory decode of what he wrote, point by point.<\/p>\n

\u201cIdeology isn\u2019t about ideas\u201d
\nAlliance Theory agrees, with a tighter mechanism.<\/p>\n

Most ideology is a badge that answers two questions:
\nWho are my people
\nWho are my enemies<\/p>\n

Once those are set, \u201cideas\u201d are mostly post hoc justifications that keep you legible to your coalition and dangerous to the rival coalition.<\/p>\n

So Huemer\u2019s observation is right. The causal story is incomplete.<\/p>\n

Why people \u201cdon\u2019t take it seriously\u201d
\nIn Alliance Theory terms, most political speech is not for cognition. It\u2019s for alliance signaling.<\/p>\n

You say the thing that shows membership. You do not necessarily live it.
\nThat is not hypocrisy in the moral sense. It\u2019s role behavior.<\/p>\n

The Covid example he gives fits this perfectly.
\nPublic compliance talk signals loyalty to the pro-order coalition.
\nPrivate behavior follows personal incentives and local norms.<\/p>\n

Personality and genes
\nAlliance Theory does not deny trait correlations. It reframes them.<\/p>\n

Traits influence which coalitions feel comfortable.
\nBut coalitions select and reward speech.<\/p>\n

So the main causal chain is:<\/p>\n

temperament nudges affiliation
\naffiliation imposes narrative
\nnarrative dictates which \u201cbeliefs\u201d are safe to state<\/p>\n

Huemer treats ideology as self-expression.
\nAlliance Theory treats it as membership management.<\/p>\n

Tribes
\nHuemer is closest to Alliance Theory here.<\/p>\n

He says people support the idea because the group holds it.
\nAlliance Theory adds the mechanism that makes this stable.<\/p>\n

Coalitions enforce boundaries using:
\nstatus rewards for conformity
\nshame for deviation
\nfriendship and career incentives
\nshared enemies that require coordinated stories<\/p>\n

That is why beliefs cluster even when they are logically unrelated.<\/p>\n

Outrage
\nAlliance Theory says outrage is not just emotion.
\nIt is a coalition weapon.<\/p>\n

Outrage does three jobs at once.
\nIt binds the in-group.
\nIt degrades the out-group.
\nIt advertises your loyalty to bystanders.<\/p>\n

That is why outrage is addictive.
\nIt pays.<\/p>\n

\u201cIdeology makes people suckers\u201d
\nThis is correct, but again, Alliance Theory sharpens it.<\/p>\n

Scams work when they:
\nconfirm the coalition\u2019s enemy image
\nreward the listener for \u201cnoticing\u201d what the other side is supposedly like<\/p>\n

Believing the scam is not a bug.
\nIt is a loyalty display.
\nIf you doubt it, you risk looking soft.<\/p>\n

So you get credulity that looks irrational but is socially rational.<\/p>\n

\u201cIdeology shifts\u201d
\nHis best example is the Republican flip on Russia and personal morality.<\/p>\n

Alliance Theory explains this cleanly.<\/p>\n

Coalitions do not primarily preserve doctrines.
\nThey preserve power, identity, and enemies.<\/p>\n

When the coalition\u2019s strategic needs change, doctrines are replaced fast.
\nThe base follows because membership matters more than policy consistency.<\/p>\n

He also notes elites are more disturbed by shifts.
\nAlliance Theory again.
\nElites have more invested in coherent justifications because their status depends on being \u201cprincipled,\u201d \u201cserious,\u201d \u201cthoughtful.\u201d
\nMass members need only a banner.<\/p>\n

What Huemer is missing
\nThree Alliance Theory pieces would upgrade his essay.<\/p>\n

A. Coalitions are not just \u201ctribes\u201d
\nThey are competitive machines that allocate status and resources.
\nIdeology is the coordination language that makes the machine work.<\/p>\n

B. Belief is often performative, but not necessarily insincere
\nPeople can half-believe and still signal.
\nThey can believe at the level required for membership.
\nThe important thing is what the belief does socially.<\/p>\n

C. Parties and movements are run on elite coalition bargains
\nMass opinion follows elite cues because elites control the coordination channels:
\nmedia, institutions, donors, professional incentives, and narrative legitimacy.<\/p>\n

So \u201cmeaningless tribalism\u201d is not meaningless.
\nIt is functional.<\/p>\n

Bottom line
\nHuemer is describing the surface correctly.
\nAlliance Theory explains the engine.<\/p>\n

His story is: people are irrational, genetic, and tribal.
\nAlliance Theory\u2019s story is: people are coalition-aware, status-sensitive, and incentive-shaped.<\/p>\n

That second story predicts the behavior better and it is less moralizing about human stupidity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Michael Huemer would benefit from learning Alliance Theory. He writes today: When I first encountered ideologies and religions, I took them at face value, as attempts to understand the world. I assumed that people sincerely believed them and would use … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[43035],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-168648","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-alliance-theory"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t