Why do the politicians lie?

In the times in which we live, saying that politicians lie is almost obvious. There are not a few leaders of all kinds of parties and ideology who have been caught saying something that they never fulfilled once they were elected by the electorate.

One might think that it is because they consider their voters to be idiots, that they will not see through the lie. However, taking into account that thanks to the Internet we can easily confirm what they have lied about, one cannot help but think Why do the politicians lie. They should know that they are going to be denied sooner or later.

Next, we will delve into this issue, seeing that, really, it is not simply about lying, but about making your falsehoods a truly powerful tool.

• Related article: "What is Political Psychology?"

Why do politicians lie so often?

Saying that politicians lie sounds almost logical. Some will say that, really, it is not like that, simply that they say they promise something in their electoral programs but because of X or Y in the end they cannot confirm it. Others, perhaps more down-to-earth, will say that indeed politicians lie consciously

with the clear intention of getting elected by their voters and then, when they are already in power, they will take it upon themselves to disappoint those who elected them.

Be that as it may, one cannot help but think that in the times in which we live, the politician who lies is a politician who is not very intelligent and cautious. Thanks to the Internet and access to all the information that exists and because it is not very difficult to find in web pages with an antagonistic ideology to that of a specific politician who brings out everything in which he has lied. Taking this into account, we might think that these people are really stupid, since they know that there is a resource that will deny everything they have said.

In an ideal and logical world, the lying politician would be caught and removed from the political race because nobody wants to vote for him. But we live neither in an ideal world nor in a logical one. The politician blatantly tells untruths, he knows that the Internet will show what he has lied about and, even so, he gets enormous fame, many voters and an incredible impact. Let's look at Donald Trump or Jair Bolsonaro. Before being chosen, they said a lot of stupid things, things that any North American or Brazilian could quickly deny, and despite this, they ended up being elected president.

Taking all this into account, in addition to the question that gives this article its name (Why do politicians lie?), we also think about how, even by lying, they manage to gain fame. It seems that this should be just the opposite and it has become clear that with these two examples that we have just mentioned, not only have well, but it seems that his fame is increasing, even with a terrible management of aspects as crucial in history as the COVID-19.

a world of falsehoods

False information, more recently composed of what is known as "fake news", seems to spread faster than the truth. We may think that believing lies or that we want to believe them is something modern, promoted by the new technologies, but it seems that this already comes from very far away, even from when there was no writing.

It seems that the existence of intergroup conflicts throughout our evolutionary history has shaped our minds. Human psychology seems to be predisposed to disseminate information that, regardless of whether it is true or not, if it meets the following characteristics, it is seen as something potentially credible.

• Mobilize the ingroup against the outgroup.
• Facilitate coordination of care and efforts within one's own group.
• Indicate the commitment to the group of the members of the ingroup.

Far from what many may think, the human mind is designed to select and disseminate information that is effective in achieving these goals, not to give certain information, especially if a social conflict is taking place. In case there is a conflict between two groups, human beings are psychologically prepared to prioritize that one. information that helps us win the conflict against the outgroup, even though objectively that information is clearly a fallacy.

It should be said that ensuring that the human being does not pay due attention to true information is not entirely true. It is adaptive and effective to have true knowledge of the outside world, especially in aspects that contribute to survival individual and group in terms of biological needs such as feeding, shelter or avoiding a threat such as a predator. For example, in a tribe, it is adaptive to tell the rest of the members where the best pastures are to hunt wildebeest.

However, in the course of human evolution our mind was generating, adopting and propagating beliefs that could be used to fulfill other functions, although the information itself was not be true. The lie has a clear evolutionary component, since otherwise we would not carry it out. By lying we can manipulate other people, make them imagine things that are not, and make them behave in a way that is beneficial to us. The lie would have served so that a group at odds with another could end the other, even if the motivation was based on falsehoods.

• You may be interested in: "Psychology of Groups: definition, functions and main authors"

Conflict in non-human animals

Naturally, the conflict or struggle is not something exclusive to the human species. On more than one occasion we have seen on television documentaries how two individuals of the same species face issues such as dominance over the territory, food or obtaining a couple. These confrontations usually follow a series of steps to assess if there are chances of victory. or else there is a high chance of losing with serious injury or even dying.

In most cases, the best predictor of coping ability is size and physical strength. This is why natural selection has been developing mechanisms in different species to be able to assess the size and strength of the opponent, in order to find out if they have any chance. We have an example of this in the deer that, before fighting, usually start to bellow. It has been seen that the volume of their calls directly correlates with their size. The bigger the volume, the bigger.

But what is surprising is that sometimes deer lie. Intent on avoiding a fight they will surely lose and bully their rival the deer with a modest size, let's say, they emit high-volume bellows, as if they were bigger than what they are. In this way, and with a little luck, they can intimidate a rival who, surely, if they had decided to fight against them they would have defeated them and left very badly injured. In this way these small deer get food, territory and partners without having to put their lives at risk.

We have another natural deception mechanism in piloerection, that is, we get goosebumps and hair rises. In the human case, this mechanism is no longer of much use to us, but in more hairy species it allows confuse the opponent by giving them the feeling that they are bigger and therefore stronger than they they really are. Thus, especially in the face of a predator or any other threatening animal, many animal species can save their lives by lying to their opponent about their size.

Intergroup Conflicts and Coalitional Instincts

In the human case, conflicts have taken an important evolutionary leap. In our species, conflicts can occur not only between individuals, but also between very large groups.. We humans know that several weak individuals don't stand a chance against a stronger individual alone, but together they can beat the crap out of him.

Alliances are a fundamental aspect in our evolutionary history, and it has been seen that it also occurs in some primates such as chimpanzees.

As individuals, if we don't have any coalition with other people, we are “naked”, weak to anyone who does. Belonging to a coalition has become an evolutionary imperative, just as important as getting food or shelter.

Human beings, although we are not a species that becomes a superorganism like ants, we do organize ourselves in a very social structure. We have acquired a very strong sense of belonging to all kinds of groups, product of our instinct to belong to a coalition that guarantees our protection and security.

Once we are inside, we end up acquiring certain patterns of behavior and thought. Our sense of belonging to the group makes us less critical of what is said within it. It is much easier for us to believe what is shared within it, even if from the outside we see it as something really delusional and not very credible. Sharing the same beliefs as the rest of the group members makes us feel more part of it, while criticism drives us away. Lying can unite a group, especially if it is told to highlight their differences with respect to the outgroup.

When there is a conflict between two groups, cohesion and coordination between the members of each group are two essential aspects to win the fight. If two groups are in dispute and find themselves on an equal footing, the one that gets Organizing yourself better, having a more homogeneous thought and taking a more synchronized action will be the winning group.

All this is directly related to why politicians and, in general, any political party or even nation lie. Lying about the characteristics of one's own group, exaggerating its virtues, about those of the other group, highlighting or inventing defects, contributes to the ingroup being even more motivated, having greater self-esteem and greater capacity for action.

An example of this we have in military parades. In them, the states present their entire broad military arsenal with a clear political intention: to intimidate the rival. By means of a perfectly synchronized army parading through the streets of the capital, showing its weapons, tanks and even artifacts that are nothing more than cardboard-stone the government sends two messages. One, that they are a great nation, exalting national pride, and two, that other countries do not dare to attack them because they are well prepared, which does not have to be true.

The other example is the speech of politicians. Politicians lie, they tell falsehoods of all kinds and conditions with the clear intention that their audience feels that if they do not vote for him they will be allowing a potential threat, either perpetrated by the political rival or by his inaction, happen. Electoral races are just another type of intergroup conflict and, as in any other, it is necessary to improve ingroup coordination through deception. Lies in these contexts serve to:

• Solve coordination problems.
• Agreeing with false beliefs is a sign of commitment to the group.
• Exerting dominance over the group by making them believe exaggerated information.

lies and coordination

Donald L. Horowitz explains in his book The Deadly Ethnic Riot that before and after the ethnic massacres that have occurred throughout the world throughout history rumors have been the tool that has served to take action. The circulation of these rumors, that is to say, unverified information and in many occasions not verifiable play a very important role when it comes to attacking the outgroup, seen as a terrible threat that will soon attack us.

The content of these rumors tends to point to the rival group as a heartless enemy, which devalues ​​our group. This outgroup is very powerful and if something is not done to stop it, it will hurt us, it may even destroy us. Rumors convey a sense of urgency, that if something is not done we are going to be badly hurt. An easy example to understand is the case of Germany when Adolf Hitler began to break into the panorama politician, saying how the Jews were conspiring to destroy the nation and that it was necessary "fend".

Many current politicians sow doubt with rumors that they cannot confirm nor do they have the intention of it. In many speeches, especially from politicians who support conspiracy ideas, it is not uncommon to find phrases like "I don't know if it's true but...", a type of verbal structure that comes to sow doubt and fear in the population, who cannot help but think "and if it's true... we should do something! already!"

lies and dominance

Making false statements can help politicians to signal their motivation to help the group in a conflict, but also to point out that that same politician has the right skills to lead the group to victory.

The human mind in times of conflict is designed to promote those leaders who have or appear to have the personal characteristics that will allow solving the problems of the ingroup in the most effective.

One of the characteristics that all politics must have is that of dominance, that is, the ability to induce compliance with an action either through intimidation or coercion. When there is a conflict, whether it is a war or just a politically tense situation, people prefer dominant leaders., reflected in his motivation for the conflict to escalate and attack the enemy once and for all. Dominance manifests itself by challenging the outgroup.

The politician who lies, who attacks another party or a follower of an antagonistic political ideology, does with the clear intention of seeing himself as dominant, a figure of power before his potential voters. He dares to say things as he thinks or how his audience wants them to be said, even if they are not true. By challenging the norms they are seen as more authentic, more daring, more true. Ironically, politicians lie to be seen as the most right and people, that we like to be told things as we believe them, not as they really are, the we continue.

Bibliographic references:

• Horowitz, D. L. (2003) The Deadly Ethnic Riot. University of California Press.
• Petersen, M., Osmundsen, M., & Tooby, J. (2020, August 29). The Evolutionary Psychology of Conflict and the Functions of Falsehood. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kaby9.