A host of psychological experiments demonstrate that it doesn\’t work like this. Instead of performing a rational cost-benefit analysis, we accept information that confirms our identity and values, and reject information that conflicts with them. We mould our thinking around our social identity, protecting it from serious challenge. Confronting people with inconvenient facts is likely only to harden their resistance to change.
I wonder if we can find an example of this? Ah, yes, here it is, in your first paragraph:
So here we are, forming an orderly queue at the slaughterhouse gate. The punishment of the poor for the errors of the rich, the abandonment of universalism, the dismantling of the shelter the state provides: apart from a few small protests, none of this has yet brought us out fighting.
It would seem to be an inconvenient fact with which we should confront you that this dismantling of all that is holy and pure in the British Welfare State is actually an attempt to take it all the way back to 2006 in size.