Understanding Republicans

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Phil Ayesho, Sep 5, 2008.

  1. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Interesting research... based upon teacher's assessments of school children... these same children were interviewed 20 years later as adults to determine their political affiliations... ( the teacher's childhood assessments had no political parameter... just socialization parameters )

    Striking patterns emerged correlative between how children behaved, and what political party they tended to endorse later in life.

    Tellingly
    "As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics."


    And also:
    "The study’s authors also concluded that conservatives have less tolerance for ambiguity, a trait they say is exemplified when George Bush says things like, "Look, my job isn’t to try to nuance. My job is to tell people what I think," and "I’m the decider." Those who think the world is highly dangerous and those with the greatest fear of death are the most likely to be conservative."


    Whereas:
    "Liberals, on the other hand, are "more likely to see gray areas and reconcile seemingly conflicting information,..."


    Of course... the republicans accused the researchers of being "liberals"

    But then, the researchers did not author the teachers' assessments of the subjects' behavior as children... nor did the researchers assess the subjects behaviors and attitudes as adults... they simply asked their political affiliations, and correlated teacher's commentary with those 20 year later party identifications.

    The teacher's assessments of the future republican children tended to use more pejorative terminology, as the traits they were seeing are seen as problematic in young children.

    While the same authoritarian, and inflexible traits that result in republican worldviews can be hugely negative... they also result in steadfastness, and reliability.
    There are positive aspects to these traits.


    However... when it comes to a world leader, in a dynamically changing world with rapidly evolving technology, choosing a leader who is intractable, inflexible and incapable of dealing with a nuanced situation is probably a very bad idea.


    In a world that requires courage... the timid and fearful are the last folks you want in charge.
     
    #1 Phil Ayesho, Sep 5, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2008
  2. B_Hickboy

    B_Hickboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,730
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    That twinge in your intestines
    psssst. there's a politics forum now. :wink:
     
  3. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Did they add a whole forum?

    Moderators feel fee to move this thread to the political forum.
     
  4. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    PS- Hick, boy... you need to take the comma out of your signature.
    The Witch isn't asking Dorothy to surrender.
    She was telling the people of emerald city to give her up.
     
  5. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    this is amusing
     
  6. Domisoldo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    4,079
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest

    Thank you Dr. Phil! Thank you!

    At long fucki*g last a topic on which I don't agree with you...It was getting so boring to always see you post my ideas 1 minute ahead of me!


    Back to the topic at hand.

    Don't you find it ironic that minutes ago you dismissed another unrelated "study" (musical preferences) on the grounds that it was more akin to "astrology" (I agreed with you then :rolleyes:).

    I really like nuance, always liked nuance, will always like nuance. That does not make me any more Republican than Democrat...

    ...but it makes me extremely leery of pseudo-scientific psycho-babble which insists on ultra-simplistic characterization a.k.a. total lack of nuance.

    Oh it feels so good to disagree with you! :yeah:





     
  7. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,250
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    I think that it is an interesting study but it is FAR from being a scientific one. It has been determined by scientists that conservatives come from a "strict father" kind of "top down" style of parenting. Where liberals come from a more "strong mother" and experienced a more nuanced and intuitive form of parenting.

    It is this nuanced and intuitive style of parenting that gives children the ability to see more ambiguity or "gray areas" as you referred to. The ones raised in a strict paternal fashion don't have very good neurological connections in their brain with which to see much of anything other than the "black and white" of a situation.

    It is why you can talk to a conservative until you are blue in the face and they will NEVER get it.


    The problem with conservatives is how they see the world and themselves. It is their powers of perception that are lacking. They consistently take the wrong side of situations and will do so until the day that they die. It is nothing for them to wholeheartedly believe in a lie... it comes quite easy for them.

    They say the same thing about liberals, but the liberals have facts on their side and the conservatives try to bend facts to win their arguments. They use bluster and straw men as often as possible. They will do anything in order to get ahead... anything. They are the biggest egos on the planet and some are completely obsessed with power and use their power to dominate and destroy.

    Most bullies grow up to be conservatives and it is the ultra confident kids who grow up to vote Republicans. The misfits and children unsure of themselves most likely grow up to be Democrats, that has been my experience.

    What is funny is, that I know conservatives inside and out, they are an open book to me... but they on the other hand, will NEVER understand liberals. Conservatives are simple people that operate largely out of the primitive urge to be "NUMBER ONE". They are more like talking animals with hands than actual human beings.
     
  8. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Domisoldo

    There is a big difference in the studies.
    The other talks about positive and ambiguous attributes using words like "warm".
    Its a fluff piece with fluff conclusions and flawed methodology.

    This one is based entirely on entirely unrelated data collected on 3 year old children 20 years ago.


    There can be no bias in the teachers assessments of the children's behavior, because the original study they were part of had nothing whatsoever to do with political affiliations, no relation to their parents political leanings.

    This single fact significantly lessens any likelihood of bias on the part of the modern researchers creeping into their conclusions.
    They can not change, edit, nor dispose of the feedback of any of the teachers on any of the original subjects.


    As the follow up was similarly unlikely to reflect bias... the researchers did not "evaluate" the subjects in any way. No personal assessment involved. The children, now grown, were simply polled on their own assessment of their current political views.

    And the correlation with teacher's observations, 20 years prior, were marked.

    For example... children who ended up as being liberals were far more likely to be described as "impulsive"... this is not a particularly positive trait.

    They were also less likely to follow instructions and rules... were often disruptive...

    If you read the actual study, the researchers listed a bunch of both positive and negative attributes that were correlated to both groups. ( unlike the all happy positive music 'study')

    It just so happens that the traits of future conservatives tended to reflect that, even as children, this group was less able to adapt to new information, less able to entertain or sympathize the perspectives of others, more motivated by fear, and more authoritarian.

    And this, coincidentally, exactly correlates with the Republican agenda- fear of terrorism, fear of immigrants, fear of homosexuality-- rigid authoritarianism- with the rank and file parroting the party line and being punished for going off party line.

    Bush's adimnistration clearly spends far more effort ENFORCING its authority than actually addressing national priorities.
    Willingly destroying a covert CIA fissionable materials tracking program to punish Valerie Plame's husband for bucking their authority.

    The administration clearly has trouble empathizing with those who aren't rich.
    Clearly has trouble adapting to changing situations... and simply can not admit error.
    They maintain their flawed world view despite overwhelming evidence they are mistaken...which only makes every error they make that much more devastating and entrenched because they can not address or react to failure.

    Despite cocnlusive evidence that warming is real and tha we have to reduce carbon emission, AND sustain future growth... the idiots of the GOP still chant about drilling for more oil...

    Incapable of comprehending what PEAKED oil productivity means ( that old supplies are drying up faster than new supplies can be brought online)

    They simply march along in lockstep... saying drill more holes... ridiculing any other ideas, that might stand a prayer of actually working faster, and better.
    Making fun of monitoring tire inflation, even though the OIL industry states that proper tire inflation would be equivalent to all the oil ANWR could hope to bring in over the next decade, and it could happen tomorrow.
    Ironic that 'conservatives' are the ones ridiculing conservation.



    I think, rather than saying you disagree, you had better pony up some argument, or some evidence, showing this study's methodology to be flawed.

    Or face up to the fact that the sad fucks who become rube-publicans are the same sad twerps who couldn't handle new ideas as children.


    At this critical juncture... with China and India willing to pay more for what will amount to the world's entire oil supply, with the US's only hope being to become a world leader in an entirely new and completely clean energy technology...

    The last thing we need in power are the childish and inflexible jerks who can't handle new concepts and a changing world.
     
    #8 Phil Ayesho, Sep 5, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2008
  9. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,250
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    I think Phil just typed what desperately needed to be said. Now that you explained it in more detail, that study sounds absolutely fascinating and right on the money. I applaud you good sir (bowing in deep respect). :smile:
     
  10. Domisoldo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    4,079
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    I clicked on the link and only found a summary article mentioning a meta-analysis involving 88 studies and 22,000 participants.

    I am not denying that the article was of interest...but please, larger meta-analysis studies can't even come up with a clear consensus on what diet works best although far less subjectivity and hard-to-quantify human psychology is involved in weight loss studies.

    Funny, that jazz and classical vs. country / western thing came up again.

    :biggrin1:

    What do you make of independents then?

    What do you make of voters whose affiliation and worldview evolves over time (their childhood certainly doesn't).

    Hint: Condi Rice adores classical and jazz and is a quite decent concert pianist. Reagan started his career in that paragon of creativity: La-La-Land.

    As for adaptability to a new environment (a very important trait I certainly admit), consider those armies of proud Democratic Party card-carrying union members in long-doomed industries. Would you call them adaptable?

    GWB sucked big weenies. Everyone knows it. You simply don't need a study to support that claim.

     
    #10 Domisoldo, Sep 5, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2008
  11. Freddie53

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    7,285
    Likes Received:
    61
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The South, USA
    But the truth in the study is amazing. I was just thinking how the Republican rhetoric hasn't changed since 1964. There is always some madman somewhere that America has to defeat. Our American way of life is totally doomed unless we RETURN to the American principles from which our nation was founded. Republicans ie conservatives tend to run on "It was better yesterday, let's go back." Liberals tend to look at the world and see the problems and want new solutions.

    Why is that hard to understand. Conservative means don't want much change. Liberal means we need some change.

    That basic truth is not going to change.

    People who tend to be scared of the future are more likely to be conservative. People who are idealists and believe our best days are ahead of us, not behind us are going to be more likely liberal.

    Conservatives do tend to see things as I'm or We are (or should be) number one. Liberals are more prone to want to share in the wealth and prosperity of the land.

    I'm not surprised at the study. But I'l add my agreement that it doesn't meet enough scientific criteria to be taken as fact. It is still a theory or opinion. Backed up with some facts, but nevertheless, not a valid scientific fact at least not yet.
     
  12. whatireallywant

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,587
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Female
    Yep, that describes me, and the people I knew growing up as well. (Hint: I was "the misfit"...)
     
  13. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Interesting. :33:
     
  14. stratedude

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,865
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    53
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ohio
    If it is true that this study was done over the couse of 20 years, then it makes perfect sense to me, AND I AM A CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN.

    But the study doesn't say ANYTHING about the vast majority of Conservatives. Here is why:

    The study was done on school children, then 20 years later, right? Well that means you are looking at people that range from ages 22-32. But everyone knows that a vast majority of adults under 30 are liberal. Even I was a far left loon back then. The adults that age that were conservative fit your study profile perfectly.

    But the truth is that MOST conservatives are FORMER LIBERALS that are older than 28, and even more older than 35.

    So the study only addresses the odd kids and disenfranchised followers that turn conservative in their young adult years. It doesn't address the HUGE vast majority of conservatives that came to their senses as aging liberals.
     
  15. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,250
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    Pardon me, but I find most present day conservative's past liberalism to be lacking and insincere.

    No TRUE liberal EVER risks turning conservative with age. Some of the most ardent liberals I know are over the age of 50.

    You were just liberal because you were trying it on for fashion and your heart was never really tied to it.

    Besides, if you are a conservative, you don't really have a heart... you have one, but it is hard and cold.

    And you desperately need a heart to be a Liberal. Maybe the Wizard could help you out? :tongue:
     
  16. Skull Mason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,101
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dirty Jersey
    However at this point, these people might better be labeled delusional...
     
  17. Shelby

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    in the internet
    At some level conservatives just want to respect the wisdom of our ancestors.
     
  18. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    They want to do more than "respect" their ancestors. Most of them wish the way we run our modern society was just like the way it was when our ancestors lived. The way some Republicans reference Reagan as if he was the greatest president that ever lived is just one clue.
     
  19. Shelby

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    in the internet
    You're probably right about most. But some want to just take the best stuff that can be gleaned from our forbears and toss the rest of the shit behind.
     
  20. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,250
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    Amen brother! Republicans are always talking about the "old days". I am like, "Old days? The old days really sucked, someone could come with a gun and take all of your shit and there would be nothing that you could do about it. In the 19th century, people pretty much did what they wanted and the law of the gun ruled the land. Posses and Lynch mobs were the norm, not the exception. There was absolutely NO consumer protection and business was as shady as you could ever imagine. Workers had little to no rights and children were forced to labor long hours at factories instead of going to school like they do today."

    The old days were complete crap and why anyone would want to slide backwards into ignorance is beyond me. The average man of the 18th and 19th century had VERY little knowledge of anything other than their profession and how to survive. They were HIGHLY racist and xenophobic by today's standards. The abuse of children and women was the norm.

    WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE WANT TO GO BACK TO THAT?

    It's all about racism and sexism, 'cause back then, the white man had ALL of the power and were like demigods, with virtually NO opposition.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted