One problem is blind allegiance, the other problem is an inordinate dependence on science to solve all the problems in the world.
Blind allegiance does not always have to be a problem. In a more orderly and less divisive world with responsible leaders blind allegiance to them can be very efficient. Emphasize that does require responsible leadership with an understanding of how things actually work. That can save the time, expense, and heartache of trying bad ideas over and over again. Because blind allegiance is not very popular, the people who practice it generally do not admit it is what they do. Instead they will claim to exercise "critical analysis" of news before making decisions. Yet it can be obvious that the Trump base does not have enough education, indeed not enough understanding of the world and how it actually works, to perform any critical analysis. Instead they just follow whatever Trump says, even if he changes it.
A likely source of the blind allegiance in the country today is that during the conflict in Vietnam a person could claim to be on the political "right" simply by following orders. It did not require much education or understanding. After the United States withdrew from Vietnam and a few years later when the Shah of Iran was overthrown, the United States could find itself on the political left, and that could include the military. Life became far more complicated than just following simple orders.
Since 1979 the political right in the United States has struggled and failed to establish an identity. The blind nationalism and blind allegiance to Donald Trump is the result of that desperation.
The Republican Party is not the only misguided political party. Many Democrats think they are better scientists than can be proved on close inspection. A childlike blind faith in science, which is just as bad or worse than any other blind faith, began developing after the space program. Then a fascination with space travel science fiction appeared in prime time television for about three decades after that. Before that science fiction had been reserved for after 11 p.m. on weekends. Before that many people disliked science because they were not any good at science. After all that television they decided they liked science, even though they were no better at it than they had been before the space program.
Too many Democrats are simply fighting for what they believe is science rather than constructing logical and scientific arguments. In that way they are much like the Republicans, fighting without understanding.
Although many Democrats do have very wrong notions of science, they probably do not believe in any scientific basis for homosexuality. They are correct, there is none. It is only the media that suggests homosexuality has any validity or makes any sense. It can seem that a large percentage of Democrats agree, rather it is likely less than one percent of Democrats agree. There is absolutely nothing doctors can do to give people born in one gender parts of another gender that actually work. That is, not yet. If it ever appears possible, that could be meaningful. For now, all the so called "gay" people can do is live in a fantasy world detached from reality. No one should be legally required to play along with those fantasies.
The notion that public broadcasting today is "scientific" is ridiculous. They need to back down from their bad science or be kicked off the air.
Despite these efforts to educate people about these problems there are still armies of people on social media who agree with Donald Trump no matter how misguided his efforts. It is not just a joke that he could "stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue," it is a disturbingly accurate description of his base.
There are still armies of people on social media fighting to defend what they believe incorrectly is science.
An important thing to understand about science is that it cannot begin to address most political problems. There is no way science can help anyone decide between communism and capitalism for example. Some people prefer the simplicity of life under communism, other people prefer the abundance of choices under capitalism. There is no science for it. See "Apollo Soyuz" and conversely study the economies of oriental communistic societies. Still the internet abounds with people who think religion is done and should be eliminated.
It was reported at one time that "religious" people had less education, earned less money, and had less stable marriages than atheists. The mistake in that report was lumping "Christians" in with all the other religions. When separated out each religion except Christianity has more education, earns more money, and has more stable marriages than atheists. (There are a few minor anomalies in the data. Catholics have the most stable marriages probably because of Henry VIII and the Saint Thomas More Society. Recent wars in the Islamic countries have lowered the numbers for Muslims a bit probably because of the peculiarities of military service.)
Again please excuse the repetition here. It appears no one is reading this entire website. This article is an attempt to address people in one article that might finally turn them toward the truth.