Why Ideology Hurts

This is a well-known issue that is commonplace in any sort of group psychology. Ideologies, roughly put, are a kind of safety mechanism for most people. Because ideologies do the following:

• Ideologies reduce complexity. Ideologies neatly sort out the good from the bad. There are clear rules, clear ways to apply the rules, and clear ways to identify who or what the rules apply to and when.
• Ideologies increase our self-esteem. Ideologies, because they give us a feeling of ingroup inclusion and identity, increase our self-esteem. Being a member of a club gives us a comparative advantage because now we can bask in the reflected glory of our group (when the Bobcats win, I feel great!) we can also apply the complexity-reducing rules to quickly denigrate others, and show how they are not as good as us. Plus, our ideology also allows us to ignore criticism or potential blindspots because the ideology is making us feel good, so our minds are primed to seek only evidence of how we’re good, not how we’re maybe not so good (AKA: confirmation bias).

A few social psychology biases/effects work to produce the effects that OP is talking about, and they usually combine for disastrous effects:

1. the accentuation effect: this is when you’re a part of group X, so you’re very aware of what makes you in group X a group, and you become very aware of how group Y is super different to your group. E.g. “As a Republican, it’s clear to see that we value hard work, while the Democrats value handouts and welfare.”
2. the attribution error: everything that’s bad with the out-group is because of their own internal personalities/characteristics. everything that’s bad with my ingroup is due to external/uncontrollable conditions. E.g. “Mexicans are lazy. But American’s can’t find work at the moment due to the economy!” Conversely, everything that’s good with my ingroup is due to the internal characteristics of the group. Everything that’s good with the outgroup is due to external uncontrollable events. E.g. “Trump is winning because he’s got good policies. Biden is winning in the polls because he’s supported by the fake news media/deep state/red herring.”
3. just-world bias: because bad things happen to group or person X, it means they had it coming in some way. OR if a group or person X is doing something bad, sooner or later, they’ll get their comeuppance. E.g. “The left has been destroying America for too long, QAnon will expose them.”
4. Groupthink effect: this effect mostly works in the background of any social group. When you’re a member of group X, you’re more likely to compromise your beliefs that deviate from group X in order to conform easier. E.g. think of a yes-man. Or think of historical examples of when Stalin asked for reports on Soviet farming, and everyone told him what he wanted to hear, rather than the truth.
5. Polarisation effect: this effect also works in the background. When you have a group discussion, moderate positions within the group begin to polarise to its extremes. E.g. you’re having a group discussion in your Marxist reading group, and one guy says “we should tax the rich more”, which is a moderate position for that group. Then another member chimes in, “No we should take away their wealth and give it away!” then another adds “No. Give ‘em the guillotine! Then give the money away” As that group discussion continues, more people will adopt the more extreme of all positions offered in order to facilitate more ingroup cohesion. It’s kinda like the groupthink effect, but far more insidious because it’s where ideas for hate-crimes, violence, etc. usually start.
6. depersonalization effect: this is what all the biases and effects accumulate into. This is when I, a member of group x, is no different from another member of group x. We’re interchangeable pieces of the machine. Same for you, a member of group y, you’re all just interchangeable parts. Killing you as a member of group y is not a big deal because you’re not really a person, just a placeholder for group y. And I feel little/no remorse because you’re not really a person because now we’re just amorphous group-blobs fighting. No personal identity, no responsibility, no rational self-reflection. A dictator’s wet-dream.

So how do we get the seeming contradiction that the left is simultaneously powerful, pervasive, and controlling, yet weak, ready to be destroyed, and ultimately corrupt? Simple. A person identifies with a certain group, and then takes on their characteristics for themselves, thus becoming a member of said group. Then the rest happens naturally. The attribution error makes sure that your group is always explaining away losses based on uncontrollable things, and explaining wins due to good traits. The bad guys are only doing bad things because of magical thinking (e.g. deep state or fake news) and the just-world bias says that eventually the bad guys will be toppled because you, the good guys, have good traits, and will eventually be rewarded for the good. It’s a giant shitshow carousel of self-sustaining bullcrap, and at its core, magical thinking.

PS: anybody saying this is somehow unique to the right-wing is deluded. This is an issue for anyone in any social group. It just so happens that sportsball group identification means maybe some guy gets punched in the jaw for saying your team’s person throws the ball really bad, and not say, changes the budget and increases the number of those living in poverty. There are certain ways the attribution bias works for left and right-wingers (I can elaborate later if people are curious). The right-wing is especially dangerous because of how deeply ingrained social biases are to the conservative mindset which values stereotype for quick and easy business-like decision making. But the left-wing has a robust historical record of depersonalising the enemy too.