Conservative. Liberal. Why we are what we are.

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Moose2, Nov 12, 2014.

  1. I can't help but notice the political threads in forum as of late. As I read the commentary in these threads I see lots of crap thrown by both left and right, and many people make emotional appeals to their causes with our even knowing it. How can people be so divided? Well, as it turns out, there are smart conservatives and smart liberals (as well as stupid versions of each)
    What makes us what we are is less a matter of "critical thinking" and more a way we are wired genetically. People who produce and watch Fox News (conservative) express a legitimate world view directed by the way their brains are wired. The sake is true for people who watch msnbc (liberals)
    Objectivism is dead. No news source has it, and no consumer has it. To claim otherwise is to live in a state of self delusion.
    I found this article which highlights the difference in mental wiring between conservatives and liberals to be fascinating. It also offers a glimmer of hope that those that we disagree with need not be our enemy. Common ground can be found, if issues are approached appropriately. Conservatives and liberals can actually be friendly with each other if they can respect that they are fundamentally different at the DNA level. Your political bend has nothing to do with your IQ and has everything to do with your brain chemistry.
    When viewing NPR (left wing) and Rush Limbaugh (right wing) through this lens, things become far more interesting.
    I wonder if forums, and people in general, can set aside their animosity in areas of political disagreement. I wonder if buckeye36 and black-dragon can sit together and share a laugh and a beer the day after an election. Anyhow, for people who are curious about why they are the way they are, here is an article I discovered while listening to NPR (which I listened to after podcasting Rush Limbaugh) ((yes, I try to avoid cocooning by listening to both sides of the political spectrum))


    BLUE STATE, red state. Big government, big business. Gay rights, fetal rights. The United States is riven by the politics of extremes. To paraphrase humor columnist Dave Barry, Republicans think of Democrats as godless, unpatriotic, Volvo-driving, France-loving, elitist latte guzzlers, whereas Democrats dismiss Republicans as ignorant, NASCAR-obsessed, gun-fondling religious fanatics. An exaggeration, for sure, but the reality is still pretty stark. Congress is in a perpetual stalemate because of the two parties' inability to find middle ground on practically anything.

    According to the experts who study political leanings, liberals and conservatives do not just see things differently. They are different—in their personalities and even their unconscious reactions to the world around them. For example, in a study published in January, a team led by psychologist Michael Dodd and political scientist John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln found that when viewing a collage of photographs, conservatives' eyes unconsciously lingered 15 percent longer on repellent images, such as car wrecks and excrement—suggesting that conservatives are more attuned than liberals to assessing potential threats.

    Meanwhile examining the contents of 76 college students' bedrooms, as one group did in a 2008 study, revealed that conservatives possessed more cleaning and organizational items, such as ironing boards and calendars, confirmation that they are orderly and self-disciplined. Liberals owned more books and travel-related memorabilia, which conforms with previous research suggesting that they are open and novelty-seeking.

    “These are not superficial differences. They are psychologically deep,” says psychologist John Jost of New York University, a co-author of the bedroom study. “My hunch is that the capacity to organize the political world into left or right may be a part of human nature.”

    Although conservatives and liberals are fundamentally different, hints are emerging about how to bring them together—or at least help them coexist. In his recent book The Righteous Mind, psychologist Jonathan Haidt of the N.Y.U. Stern School of Business argues that liberals and conservatives need not revile one another as immoral on issues such as birth control, gay marriage or health care reform. Even if these two worldviews clash, they are equally grounded in ethics, he writes. Meanwhile studies by Jost and others suggest that political views reside on a continuum that is mediated in part by universal human emotions such as fear. Under certain circumstances, everyone can shift closer to the middle—or drift further apart.

    The Fear Factor

    Psychologists have found that conservatives are fundamentally more anxious than liberals, which may be why they typically desire stability, structure and clear answers even to complicated questions. “Conservatism, apparently, helps to protect people against some of the natural difficulties of living,” says social psychologist Paul Nail of the University of Central Arkansas. “The fact is we don't live in a completely safe world. Things can and do go wrong. But if I can impose this order on it by my worldview, I can keep my anxiety to a manageable level.”

    Anxiety is an emotion that waxes and wanes in all of us, and as it swings up or down our political views can shift in its wake. When people feel safe and secure, they become more liberal; when they feel threatened, they become more conservative. Research conducted by Nail and his colleague in the weeks after September 11, 2001, showed that people of all political persuasions became more conservative in the wake of the terrorist attacks. Meanwhile, in an upcoming study, a team led by Yale University psychologist Jaime Napier found that asking Republicans to imagine that they possessed superpowers and were impermeable to injury made them more liberal. “There is some range within which people can be moved,” Jost says.

    More practically, instead of trying to change people's emotional state (an effect that is temporary), astute policy makers might be able to phrase their ideas in a way that appeals to different worldviews. In a 2010 paper Irina Feygina, a social psychology doctoral student at N.Y.U. who works with Jost, found a way to bring conservatives and liberals together on global warming. She and her colleagues wondered whether the impulse to defend the status quo might be driving the conservative pooh-poohing of environmental issues.

    In an ingenious experiment, the psychologists reframed climate change not as a challenge to government and industry but as “a threat to the American way of life.” After reading a passage that couched environmental action as patriotic, study participants who displayed traits typical of conservatives were much more likely to sign petitions about preventing oil spills and protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

    Environmentalism may be an ideal place to find common political ground. “Conservatives who are religious have this mind-set about being good stewards of the earth, to protect God's creation, and that is very compatible with green energy and conservation and other ideas that are usually classified as liberal,” Nail says.

    Moral Scorecards

    On topics where liberals and conservatives will never see eye to eye, opposing sides can try to cultivate mutual respect. In The Righteous Mind, Haidt identifies several areas of morality. Liberals, he says, tend to value two of them: caring for people who are vulnerable and fairness, which for liberals tends to mean sharing resources equally. Conservatives care about those things, too, but for them fairness means proportionality—that people should get what they deserve based on the amount of effort they have put in.

    In a 2009 study Haidt and two of his colleagues presented more than 8,000 people with a series of hypothetical actions. Among them: kick a dog in the head; discard a box of ballots to help your candidate win; publicly bet against a favorite sports team; curse your parents to their faces; and receive a blood transfusion from a child molester. Participants had to say whether they would do these deeds for money and, if so, for how much—$10? $1,000? $100,000? More? Liberals were reluctant to harm a living thing or act unfairly, even for $1 million, but they were willing to betray group loyalty, disrespect authority or do something disgusting, such as eating their own dog after it dies, for cash. Conservatives said they were less willing to compromise on any of the moral categories.

    Haidt has a message for both sides. He wants the left to acknowledge that the right's emphasis on laws, institutions, customs and religion is valuable. Conservatives recognize that democracy is a huge achievement and that maintaining the social order requires imposing constraints on people. Liberal values, on the other hand, also serve important roles: ensuring that the rights of weaker members of society are respected; limiting the harmful effects, such as pollution, that corporations sometimes pass on to others; and fostering innovation by supporting diverse ideas and ways of life.

    Haidt is not out to change people's deepest moral beliefs. Yet he thinks that if people could see that those they disagree with are not immoral but simply emphasizing different moral principles, some of the antagonism would subside. Intriguingly, Haidt himself has morphed from liberal to centrist over the course of his research. He now finds value in conservative tenets that he used to reject reflexively: “It's yin and yang. Both sides see different threats; both sides are wise to different virtues.”
     
  2. I like this thread moose! Go Conservatives ! :lol:
     
  3. Well as you know mr obama and his administration consider us stupid and have to lie to us in order to get things done. Look at his obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber blasted not once but twice saying they had to lack transparency on the bill because Americans would not pass it. He called the lack of transparency "Stupidity of the American voter."
     
  4.  
  5. Also, your opinion isnt always out of free will. Think about identical twins for a second. I am an identical twin i i often say the exact same thing, at the exact same time, at the exact same vocal tone.

    This is just an example of how your brains are genetically hardwired to have an opinion (just like you said in the OP). So when most people speak, isnt because they want to speak but they are programmed to say something at that time. And what they say isnt because they want to say it, but they say what they say because they genetically have to.

    How about your "free will" now :evillaugh:
     
  6. Don't get me wrong, but didn't you make most of those political threads Moose?
     
  7. Liberals lack common sense and conservatives have more common sense
     
  8. I shall speak for the Radicals. Capitalism is the root of all evil. The only way to get rid of the capitalist market is to have a social control over the economy's base. We shall not let the government and big businesses run the market any longer! The people need control the economy! This will allow us to protect the people and consumers from businesses taking advantage of us! Big business lower the wages and benefits of its employees while still seeking growth! We have become a market of grow or die! You either grow, grow, grow, or get sucked into the realm of failed businesses. We need to change how large firms and businesses exist and operate! We need to place restrictions on them to protect the people! Remember, capitalism is destroying this country! Power to the people!!!!

    Radicalism forever!!!!!
     
  9. Right, "we lack common sense." This is coming from a guy who supports a political party who's more fanatical members are always bashing president Obama for supposedly being a "Secret Muslim from Kenya, with plans to destroy the United States."
    Typical inconsiderate Tea Party supporter. :roll:
     
  10. By "people", I believe that you mean the rich, upper class of the United States. :roll:
     
  11. Oh wait, I see a mistake in what I was just saying. You must be speaking for the Communists.
    Nah, I think I'll stick with Democracy for now. :)
     
  12. Lmao how can you compare a real event to pretending to be a super hero?

    I was thinking the exact same thing. :lol:
     
  13. How do you know of I support the tea party I actually support no party and believe in the fair tax for all at 15% so everyone will pay the same amount and don't believe in having a health care system where hard working people pay for people who do not work.
     
  14. No, we look out for the consumers. The "rich" people have gotten their wealth from the capitalist market, in which we do not believe in. We want the people, not just rich people, to have social control over the economy's base. We do not want a few individuals controlling it. We want the people to control it. The government recognizes big business as an individual, which means they can give as much money as they want for people to lobby for them. With big businesses having control and influence over the government they are able to get laws passed that benefit them and make them mostly invincible. We need to place certain restrictions on big business and allow the people to control the market. That is the only way we can have a fair, competitive market.

    Radicalism!!!!
     
  15. Classical Republic ftw.
     
  16. All I have to say is look at history dems have always put the common people down and rep have always tried to help the common people while helping them selves


    Dems want big gov and people who stay slaves to the system

    Rep seem to want people to work for the things they want

    Liberals are dems

    Conservatives are rep
     
  17. Well, looks like my idea of looking at our opposition as people with a legitimately different life perspective and an alternate set of morality just went directly to hell.
     
  18. Well, you forgot about the radicals, so I decided to express our views about capitalism.
     
  19. I've made two, I think, maybe 3. Black-drafon has made one political thread, and with the return if buckey36, I've seen 2 from his keyboard (with an implied assurance of many more to come)
    I just tossed this out there to act ad kind if a window into our selves and ituer forumers
     
  20. First off, I never specifically stated that "I knew" that you were a member of the Tea Party. What you were saying, how "Conservatives have more common sense than Liberals", seems to radiate a bit of their (backwards) beliefs. Also, you say that everyone should pay the same amount, when it comes to taxes. What about the wealthy upper class of society? Shouldn't they have to pay more than everyone else? I can understand the argument that some people make, that if the wealthy earn their money fair and square, then they should be able to keep it. Now, that's all well and good, but most of the upper class have utterly ENORMOUS amounts of money. Many people also inherit this money, rather than earning it themselves. Is it fair that they are allowed tax breaks, while the middle and lower classes must pay their fair share? No, it certainly isn't. :|