NationStates Jolt Archive

Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the Vietnam War to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations?

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

Fear and aggression

Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

Uncertainty avoidance

Need for cognitive closure

Terror management

-- now on a related matter: Many argue that political beliefs and personal issues & lifestyles are completely independent from each other. But this simply proves the fact that your political views do affect other aspects of your life, and vise versa. Why? Well because the way you see politics is based on your personal ideological contents. Its based on what you think is right or wrong --in other words, your ethics, which are intertwined with the psychological factors mentioned above.

so, i'd like to see what you people have to say about all this.

More liberal propaganda/lies (delete where applicable)!

You idiot, you've doomed us all! :o

*Runs and hides from imminent flamewar*

WOW!!!! Now that's what I call original...

No, wait, it isn't.

Nevermind. :roll:

A US. Passport?

I'm sure you can box in certain truisms about most conservatives, as I'm sure the same could be done to liberals.

Fear and aggression

Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

I think without question those two are good calls. Accurate of the die hard conservative.

I would be interested in your source for this though. I just like to read for myself to make sure you haven't taken some of this out of context.

I personally agree with the two I've highlighted.. but I would still like to see the source.

I'm sure you can box in certain truisms about most conservatives, as I'm sure the same could be done to liberals.

Fear and aggression

Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

I think without question those two are good calls. Accurate of the die hard conservative.

I would be interested in your source for this though. I just like to read for myself to make sure you haven't taken some of this out of context.

I personally agree with the two I've highlighted.. but I would still like to see the source.

my sources were taken from a press release by UC Berkeley and from an article in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin. and yes, you're right; the first two are definitely characteristics of die hard conservatives.

That's pretty good. But we must keep this thread a secret, for surely one of the dreaded NS conservatives will arrive...
*looks to his left, sees Panhandlia...*
Ah crap. *dons his FlameMaster3000 flamehelmet*

you can read the paper itself.
http://faculty-gsb.stanford.edu/Jost/_private/Political_Conservatism_as_Motivated_Social_Cognition.pdf

More liberal

(delete where applicable)!

done!

More liberal

(delete where applicable)!

done!

Hahaha yay! Good for you!

*Claps*

:mrgreen:

you can read the paper itself.
http://faculty-gsb.stanford.edu/Jost/_private/Political_Conservatism_as_Motivated_Social_Cognition.pdf

Ah yes! thanks. i couldnt remember the address. well now you ppl can read the actual paper and see how i wasnt making things up....and no! its not propaganda. i'm merely showing the results of scientific research.

That's pretty good. But we must keep this thread a secret, for surely one of the dreaded NS conservatives will arrive...
*looks to his left, sees Panhandlia...*
Ah crap. *dons his FlameMaster3000 flamehelmet*

lol dreaded conservatives, eh. True, some can be evil Money driven religious segregationist freaks (emphasis on "evil"). hehe..but like i said, only some conservatives, not all.

lol and wouldnt you have to turn to the "right" to see Panhendlia instead of the "left"?

That's pretty good. But we must keep this thread a secret, for surely one of the dreaded NS conservatives will arrive...
*looks to his left, sees Panhandlia...*
Ah crap. *dons his FlameMaster3000 flamehelmet*

lol dreaded conservatives, eh. True, some can be evil Money driven religious segregationist freaks (emphasis on "evil"). hehe..but like i said, only some conservatives, not all.

lol and wouldnt you have to turn to the "right" to see Panhendlia instead of the "left"?

As I believe I have pointed out on this forum before.. there is quite a difference between what we know as "Traditional Conservatism" and this new breed of "Neo-Conservatives" that we are seeing today. A big difference. I'm a liberal to the bone.. well, perhaps not in all things. I'm basically a social liberal with some compassionate conservative economic policies that I believe in.. however, I do believe that if we want services.. some one has to pay for them, thus, also a realist.. Only two things certain in this life.. "Death & Taxes"

Stephistan.....youve checked out the gameplay forum by now right?

Stephistan.....youve checked out the gameplay forum by now right?

Of course.. hehe I'm a Game Moderator.. :P

Stephistan.....youve checked out the gameplay forum by now right?

Of course.. hehe I'm a Game Moderator.. :P


I dont even know what was going on there.....there was you and a baby...and I think a llama......anyway thats off topic

Stephistan.....youve checked out the gameplay forum by now right?

Of course.. hehe I'm a Game Moderator.. :P


I dont even know what was going on there.....there was you and a baby...and I think a llama......anyway thats off topic

Hahaha, yeah it's kewl.. I just had a baby about two months ago.. so I believe it was Loop who posted a pic.. it's all good :)

That's pretty good. But we must keep this thread a secret, for surely one of the dreaded NS conservatives will arrive...
*looks to his left, sees Panhandlia...*
Ah crap. *dons his FlameMaster3000 flamehelmet*

lol dreaded conservatives, eh. True, some can be evil Money driven religious segregationist freaks (emphasis on "evil"). hehe..but like i said, only some conservatives, not all.

lol and wouldnt you have to turn to the "right" to see Panhendlia instead of the "left"?

As I believe I have pointed out on this forum before.. there is quite a difference between what we know as "Traditional Conservatism" and this new breed of "Neo-Conservatives" that we are seeing today. A big difference. I'm a liberal to the bone.. well, perhaps not in all things. I'm basically a social liberal with some compassionate conservative economic policies that I believe in.. however, I do believe that if we want services.. some one has to pay for them, thus, also a realist.. Only two things certain in this life.. "Death & Taxes"

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

That's pretty good. But we must keep this thread a secret, for surely one of the dreaded NS conservatives will arrive...
*looks to his left, sees Panhandlia...*
Ah crap. *dons his FlameMaster3000 flamehelmet*

lol dreaded conservatives, eh. True, some can be evil Money driven religious segregationist freaks (emphasis on "evil"). hehe..but like i said, only some conservatives, not all.

lol and wouldnt you have to turn to the "right" to see Panhendlia instead of the "left"?

As I believe I have pointed out on this forum before.. there is quite a difference between what we know as "Traditional Conservatism" and this new breed of "Neo-Conservatives" that we are seeing today. A big difference. I'm a liberal to the bone.. well, perhaps not in all things. I'm basically a social liberal with some compassionate conservative economic policies that I believe in.. however, I do believe that if we want services.. some one has to pay for them, thus, also a realist.. Only two things certain in this life.. "Death & Taxes"

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

Yes, we're called liberals..lol often center of the spectrum as well :)

Why be left when you can be RIGHT?

Pigeonholing conservatives for the sake of making yourselves appear educated is really quite sad. The same goes for those who would pigeonhole those nasty socialists bent on big government and welfare (gimmie gimmie gimmie).

But seriously, what does anyone hope to achieve from this dribble? Get used to it, there are conservatives and socialists and many other politically minded factions out in the world. Nothing will change.

Perhaps try working with one another (bi-partisanship, yes it is a real word, it refers normally to conservatives and socialists putting ideology aside to work in the nation's best interest - a rare occurance) instead of against each other.

The more people bicker over ideology, the less work gets done. Nobody ever wins these debates.

Why be left when you can be RIGHT?

Pigeonholing conservatives for the sake of making yourselves appear educated is really quite sad. The same goes for those who would pigeonhole those nasty socialists bent on big government and welfare (gimmie gimmie gimmie).

But seriously, what does anyone hope to achieve from this dribble? Get used to it, there are conservatives and socialists and many other politically minded factions out in the world. Nothing will change.

Perhaps try working with one another (bi-partisanship, yes it is a real word, it refers normally to conservatives and socialists putting ideology aside to work in the nation's best interest - a rare occurance) instead of against each other.

The more people bicker over ideology, the less work gets done. Nobody ever wins these debates.

pigeonholing? Hmmm. how hard is it to understand what scientific research means?

"nasty socialists bent on big government and welfare (gimmie gimmie gimmie)." i believe this sort of speech is highly subjective, immature. and..well..stereotypical. so maybe if you show evidence and stop using a tone that implies your obvious self-defence mode, and maybe someone will take you seriously.

Oh the socialist left can never take a joke :roll: No wonder the Soviets always looked miserable.

Take a joke on the welafre thing.

As for serious, haha, nobody takes anybody seriously here. This is NS, not the real world (although you could mistake it to be so sometimes)

Oh the socialist left can never take a joke :roll: No wonder the Soviets always looked miserable.

Take a joke on the welafre thing.

As for serious, haha, nobody takes anybody seriously here. This is NS, not the real world (although you could mistake it to be so sometimes)

Benicius, can you...well this is just me trying to help....can you actually comment on what this topic is about? i'm sure you can find something better than "Pigeonholing." :D

Why must conservatives always see things in black and white? They are like “you’re either right or wrong.” They don’t bother going through complex, intellectual thinking in order to understand or justify some of their positions. It's this way of thinking that makes many liberals squirm. :?

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

Reads the OP. Reads the above. Laughs at the hypocracy.

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

Reads the OP. Reads the above. Laughs at the hypocracy.

oh? do explain!

More liberal propaganda/lies (delete where applicable)!


I know thats true, hell will freeze over before a Liberal tells the truth about Conservatives.

Dude, your complaining about stereotyping and then you go slap a big label on conservatives yourself. Here's your generalization, in case you missed it : Why must conservatives always see things in black and white? They are like “you’re either right or wrong.” They don’t bother going through complex, intellectual thinking in order to understand or justify some of their positions.

(That was the above, the OP was the quote, If I'm interpreting him correctly).

Dude, your complaining about stereotyping and then you go slap a big label on conservatives yourself. Here's your generalization, in case you missed it : Why must conservatives always see things in black and white? They are like “you’re either right or wrong.” They don’t bother going through complex, intellectual thinking in order to understand or justify some of their positions.

(That was the above, the OP was the quote, If I'm interpreting him correctly).

ah yes, a generalization indeed...meaning many conservatives are like that but not all. is that more clear to you? and its not just my personal opinion. it was determined by university prof.

While the "study" does bring some points that make sense, there are a few things to remember.

1. Such studies of people can be easily manipulated into supporting the outcome you want. I.E. if someone want's to create a "study as to why such and such thinking is bad" it is quite easy to maniuplate towards that end. As such I'm highly suspicious of the study (regardless of what "side" it supports)

2. It comes from UC Berkley, the area definately has a "liberal" bent (last I checked at least). Not that this is wrong, but I'd hardly trust them for unbaised political studies.
---Correction: The Study is a joint project. However I'm still curious as to the political leanings of those leading the study.

3. The fact that someone felt the need to "study what causes a certain political belief" raises some red flags (at least to me). I imagine a good number of you would be equally suspicious of those "studying the cause of liberalism".

Perhaps I'll read up on it later, when I have time (Damn you college.)
Why must conservatives always see things in black and white? They are like “you’re either right or wrong.” They don’t bother going through complex, intellectual thinking in order to understand or justify some of their positions. It's this way of thinking that makes many liberals squirm.
Now here you go complaining that "conservatives" only think in black and white, etc, etc. Going as far as to say that they don't bother to "go through complex, intellectual thinking" (i.e. their idiots).
The hypocrasy is rather blatant, as you go on later to complain about being labeled all the time, yet using broad negative labels of conservatives.
"You're a lazy pro-drug hippie", and "they don't think about things and only see in black and white"

Now if you didn't mean all conservatives, please clarify. But for now, I can only assume that you meant all conservatives. (You used conservatives without further classification as to any sub group, therefore the term implies the whole of the conservative group.)

While the "study" does bring some points that make sense, there are a few things to remember.

1. Such studies of people can be easily manipulated into supporting the outcome you want. I.E. if someone want's to create a "study as to why such and such thinking is bad" it is quite easy to maniuplate towards that end. As such I'm highly suspicious of the study (regardless of what "side" it supports)

2. It comes from UC Berkley, the area definately has a "liberal" bent (last I checked at least). Not that this is wrong, but I'd hardly trust them for unbaised political studies.

3. The fact that someone felt the need to "study what causes a certain political belief" raises some red flags (at least to me). I imagine a good number of you would be equally suspicious of those "studying the cause of liberalism".

Why must conservatives always see things in black and white? They are like “you’re either right or wrong.” They don’t bother going through complex, intellectual thinking in order to understand or justify some of their positions. It's this way of thinking that makes many liberals squirm.
Now here you go complaining that "conservatives" only think in black and white, etc, etc. Going as far as to say that they don't bother to "go through complex, intellectual thinking" (i.e. their idiots).
The hypocrasy is rather blatant, as you go on later to complain about being labeled all the time, yet using broad negative labels of conservatives.
"You're a lazy pro-drug hippie", and "they don't think about things and only see in black and white"

Now if you didn't mean all conservatives, please clarify. But for now, I can only assume that you meant all conservatives. (You used conservatives without further classification as to any sub group, therefore the term implies the whole of the conservative group.)

ok. it's clarified! read the post above yours! :D

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

Reads the OP. Reads the above. Laughs at the hypocracy.

oh? do explain!
In addition to the points made above, the study promotes the stereotype that conservatism is an irrational behavior based on fear. You complain about being stereotyped while stereotyping. That is hypocracy, and I found it quite funny.

To be more precise…these patters of thinking were discovered by university professors of psychology......and i'm not calling conservatives idiots...they're just less "integratively complex" than others are. but it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded.

Good point! Many conservative wackos think that just because i'm a liberal, i'm gonna be like some sort of lazy pro-drug hippy, but that coundn't be further from the truth. Can't people ditch the whole political stereotyping and labeling and just be rational human beings?

Reads the OP. Reads the above. Laughs at the hypocracy.

oh? do explain!
In addition to the points made above, the study promotes the stereotype that conservatism is an irrational behavior based on fear. You complain about being stereotyped while stereotyping. That is hypocracy, and I found it quite funny.

your claim that the study promotes stereotyping is simply ur opinion. and it might or might not be true. the point is, i'm merely showing the facts or findings that came out of this research.

To be more precise…these patters of thinking were discovered by university professors of psychology......and i'm not calling conservatives idiots...they're just less "integratively complex" than others are. but it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded.

Can you please define the term less "integratively complex". Because, to me, it does looks like a disingenious code word way of saying simple minded...

your claim that the study promotes stereotyping is simply ur opinion. and it might or might not be true. the point is, i'm merely showing the facts or findings that came out of this research.

Please read more carefully. I did not say the study promotes stereotyping. I said it promotes a stereotype.

edited to correct the tags

your claim that the study promotes stereotyping is simply ur opinion. and it might or might not be true. the point is, i'm merely showing the facts or findings that came out of this research.

Please read more carefully. I did not say the study promotes stereotyping. I said it promotes a stereotype.

edited to correct the tags

A properly conducted study cannot promote anything, as data is objective. Data has no underlying motivations, and as such, promotes no agenda. Data presents what data presents, and we have to deal with the implications. One can argue that the researchers were biased, but then, I've yet to see anyone point out flaws in this study, merely suspicions with circumstantial evidence at best (ie: they're from Berkeley, they must be biased).

Find something wrong with the study, then complain. Til then, citing that studies can be biased and data manipulated is nothing but a crutch to support a weak argument. If you can't find any specific instance or example of such bias, it's meaningless to say these things.

First of all, UTLPNA please clarify when you are making your own statements and when you are quoting. I could not read the link you posted due to a compouter problem. (I did read this elsewhere quite some time ago). As far as I can teel, many of the statements you have passed off as your own have been direct, un-cited quotations from this article:
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml


A properly conducted study cannot promote anything, as data is objective. Data has no underlying motivations, and as such, promotes no agenda. Data presents what data presents, and we have to deal with the implications. One can argue that the researchers were biased, but then, I've yet to see anyone point out flaws in this study, merely suspicions with circumstantial evidence at best (ie: they're from Berkeley, they must be biased).

Find something wrong with the study, then complain. Til then, citing that studies can be biased and data manipulated is nothing but a crutch to support a weak argument. If you can't find any specific instance or example of such bias, it's meaningless to say these things.

This would be true, if it were a properly conducted survey.
As mentioned above, politically motivated studies are (and should be) automatically suspected of bias and agenda.
From what I have seen, there is a worrysome use of politically charged and negatively weighted terms (fear, aggression, terror, dogmatism, etc.). Also, the study group does not seem to have been well defined. "Right-wing populism", "conservative ideologies", the Indian caste system, South African apartheid, segregationism, Sen. Strom Thurmond, Hitler, Mussolini, President Ronald, Reagan, and Rush Limbaugh have all been lumped together. This ignores the quite extreme diferences between the "moral" or religious right and the economic right.
Finally this conclusion:
...that conservatives are less "integratively complex" than others are, Glaser said, "it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded."
smacks of bias. As I indicated above, without a definition (which neither the OP nor the researchers appear to have given), this appears to be an attempt to smear conservatives.
Further comments and rebutals can be found here:
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~jonjayray/unschol.html