I just came by the most fascinating article written by an psychologist who was attempting to discover why Americans vote for Republicans, even though it seems against their self-interest, and why liberals do not understand the mind-set of Republicans and Conservatives. Actually, it seems to be attempting to answer the question of whether Republicans are evil, or are we just dumb. However, along the way he accidentally makes a few interesting points.
Have you ever wondered when you are talking to a liberal, why they can’t get the basic tenant of what you are talking about? For instance, in college I would often debate them in class and they could never comprehend where I was coming from. I’ve read Marx/Engles, I know all about the far left ideology, I understand it perfectly well, I just think its all horse crap. However, I always noticed this disconnect in their responses to me. It was almost like we were arguing different things because they could not see the basis of where I was coming from.
Well, as it turns out, there is a reason for that. According to Prof. Haidth, Conservatives, he said, prove quite adept at thinking like liberals, but liberals are consistently incapable of understanding the conservative point of view. “Liberals feel contempt for the conservative moral view, and that is very, very angering. Republicans are good at exploiting that anger.â€? This quote comes from a New York Times article about this same article. Ann Coulter wrote a book called “How to Talk to Your Liberal Friends.” I’ve often felt a book like that would be useful. If I sit down and try to talk about tax policy all I get is “Bush lied children died.” Even among elitist liberals like my father (a law professor) there is this inability for him to truly see the point I’m trying to make in many instances.
Haidth also identifies another problem liberals consistently have:
This is the first rule of moral psychology: feelings come first and tilt the mental playing field on which reasons and arguments compete. If people want to reach a conclusion, they can usually find a way to do so. The Democrats have historically failed to grasp this rule, choosing uninspiring and aloof candidates who thought that policy arguments were forms of persuasion.
Man, does this describes just about every Democrat from Obama to Kerry to Gore or what? However, notice, this does not describe Clinton. Clinton got it. What is his most famous quote (not that one) “I feel your pain.” Whether he did or not, Clinton always came off as a humble good ole boy who did get what America was all about. With Gore, Kerry and even Obama you just do not have that same sense. I mean, we get they intellectually understand the Constitution, etc., but they don’t get the community aspects of America, what I would call mom, apple pie and the flag. That is where there is a large disconnect between liberalism and conservativism.









September 16th, 2008 at 6:38 am
If Liberals are Idiots, as you put it, then you should not be lost of the understanding that what is happening in the country right now is Republican. Now, in our idiocracy, we realize that the world is made of dualities. Republicans exist so that Democrats know what not to be. The war was a lie and backfired on their faces…
If am an idiot then I would rather stay an idiot. If the current status of the country is ‘not idiotic’ then I wonder what to call the Republicans.
September 16th, 2008 at 6:47 am
What exactly are you referring to as “what is happening in the country right now is Republican?” Do you mean he war which nearly every single Democrat approved and voted for? Oh yeah, it turns out they were subject to the exact same intelligence that Bush had, even Ford admitted that, though he wasn’t supposed to because that broke your meme.
Let me just make this point. Bush’s approval numbers are about ~38%. The democrat controlled congress is 9%! As a percentage, more Americans believe that the US government blew up the WTC then support our current Congress. Ya’ll can push this we hate Bush (clearly you guys do have an irrational hatred for the man like nothing I’ve ever seen before) but its doing you no good because the average independent American isn’t buying it. I mean, did you even read the article I linked? It explains it for you in black and white.
Hey, if you guys want to keep nominating these knuckleheads that’s fine with me, but you’ll keep on loosing. I mean, since 1964, you guys have had one presidential candidate who won more then 50% of the vote, keep it up!
September 16th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Obama.
You just made the authors point for him.
Bryan writes;
“If I sit down and try to talk about tax policy all I get is “Bush lied children died.â€?
And in response you say;
” Republicans exist so that Democrats know what not to be. The war was a lie and backfired on their faces…”
You divert from the context which is a difference in philosophies and go right to the war.
Amazing.
“Bush lied children died”
“The war was a lie and backfired in their faces”
Liberalism’s total make up contains many aspects of socialism and at some points snuggles right up next to communism.
These kinds of governing policies have shown in the past to be failures.
And yet the emotional aspects of democrats keeps them trying the same methods over and over again, just under different brands or names.
People with emotional compulsory disorders often find themselves victims of this hamster wheel mentality. Its called insanity.
More or less its to do the same thing over and over again and each time expecting different results.
I was a liberal up until about ten years ago.
I had spent my entire life since I was 12 getting high and drinking my a$$ off.
I realized that my desire to change the world instead of myself , which is what most liberals aspire to do was the one thing that was killing me.
Instead of being an individual and taking responsibility for my own actions I blamed the whole world for all my problems and felt it was everyone else’s duty to do something about my problems except for me.
We see this mind set is prevalent in most liberals who operate on an entitlement expectation.
I took handouts from the government and blamed society and its effects on me for all my shortcomings.
The only way out it seemed was to change the world and everything about it that rubbed me the wrong way.
After being sick and tired of being sick and tired I adopted a “individualistic” doctrine into my life and things immediately began to get better.
I realized that it was a lot easier to change myself and adapt to the world around me as opposed to expecting everyone to understand me.
This is why we see liberals going nuts the way they do.
They are banging their heads against the wall trying to get others to see things their way and adopt their thinking.
Whereas the conservative or republican is more apt to try to understand those around him instead of expecting everyone to understand him.
I found much more peace and sobriety in understanding others rather than driving myself crazy trying to get the whole world to change and understand me.
Now, about that war.
You guys have yet to prove any lies.
You have been saying this for years now, you havnt proved anyone lied, and yet you keep saying it.
Its like that hamster.
You figure if you keep pushing you’ll get there one day and it will be true.
The reason we went to war in the first place was to avoind the results of a threat being unattended to.
Much as was the case with Al Queda and Saddam was beggining to take on a very deceptive nature in his unwillingness to cooperate.
As Bryan pointed out, we all got the same info that lead up to the war.
But somehow now that its not expedient for liberal purposes that info has gone from what everyone percieved as a threat to now being a lie.
Amazing.
Whats happening right now is republican ?
Hmmm.
Did you know that the main reason the fed is going broke is because of entitlements we cant afford ?
Revenues have remained much the same while the scale of entitlements has risen sharply in contrast.
I would say the liberal mindset of everyone deserving a hand out because everyone owes them something is whats killing our economy.
And I would be more than willing to bet that its liberalism that got us there.
Wealth redistribution has always failed as a governing method and yet you guys keep doing it.
You ignore history and continue with the same methods. Hoping it will all work out better than the last time.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Screw Liberals. Screw Republicans. Screw Washington.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Is it idiotic to vote for a politician who discusses issues instead of simply rallying everyone around mom and apple pie for the nth time? I like applie pie and love my mother as much as the next person. Telling me I’m special for it isn’t enough to get my vote, though. I agree that playing to voters’ emotions is the better political strategy. But liberals would argue that liberal politicians’ tendency to talk about issues is only “idiotic” if you assume that conservative and swing voters are idiots. Republicans are apparently capable of understanding the intellectual arguments liberals make, but they choose to dismiss them for rousing speeches about apple pie and small towns. How is that smart, with all the problems this country is facing? It’s why Republican Mike Murphy called the Palin choice cynical: it was depressingly pessimistic for him to believe that voters would lower their standards low enough to support a candidate with as few qualifications as Palin, just for the fix that hearing about small towns and seeing a candidate that affirmed their “values” (one of them being…good parenting?) would deliver.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Micky, most of the entitlements we can’t afford go to red states! Farm subsidies, payments to Alaskan citizens for just being there (never mind all of the resources in Alaska), welfare (yes, supports mostly red staters). I’m a liberal and I support getting rid of those entitlements, and more. I think you have liberals wrong there.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I once was a far Left liberal and I can tell you it isn’t born of lack of intelligence. It is born of an emotional disorder, a victim mentality, an anti-authority perspective.
What Liberals miss is that they ARE being understood, but to them that should equate to agreement. If you can understand the flow of their illogic, then you should agree. No. It’s like talking with a selfish child. They explain their position, and a parent can follow along, but the answer is still a different one than the child selfishly arrived at.
Liberals NEVER understand sound reasoning, never accept that leftist and liberal policies have a long-term detrimental effect. To follow logic to its ultimate end, to look at historical trends, etc., in intellectual honesty would be to see what is wrong with the positions they hold to like frantic, hysterical victims. Theirs is an emotional perspective which skews the ability to reason in the political sphere.
it isn’t stupidity. It isn’t for lack of education. It is a rabid, emotional blindness to sound reasoning. They know the change-the-subject tactic, the “yeah, but” dodges, the smear tactics, the repeat a lie long enough approach to everything. They have no interest in understanding conservative policy, no interest in the overwhelming success of conservative policies vs. the overwhelming failure of liberal ones. And over and over, liberals accuse the Right of the very drives and goals which they themselves harbor. They tenaciously hold to their liberalism out of fear and a victim mentality.
They cannot understand a conservative because they WILL NOT. It is an unconscious function generally. And I know it from experiencing it from both sides. Every former liberal understands what I am talking about.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Baloney Detector. I’m a liberal. I work very hard and almost half of my income goes to paying taxes. I don’t see myself as a victim one bit. What are you talking about? A victim of what, exactly?
September 16th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Hmmm…
June.
You got it wrong.
Most people who are dependent on entitlements vote democrat.
Fact.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:40 am
An anecdote:
I have an avowed Liberal friend, an agnostic, who was lamenting the way that today’s young people have no respect for their elders. He told me of a mall in an upper-middle class California community where he and his retired friends are loathe to go because the kids are such foul-mouthed, disrespectful punks.
“How did we get here?” he asked with a straight face.
Then he told me of a sporting event he’d attended where kids of the same age were in great numbers. The kids from California were disrespectful and punkish. Ah, but the Mormon kids from Utah in attendance in support of their team were very respectful toward him. He said it was like a flashback to the 50s when he was growing up.
The two were linked, not by logic, but by one group being respectful, while the other was not. He didn’t even catch the key detail he’d shared with me.
And it absolutely flummoxed him that it was his political positions on things like education, morality, sexuality, and the like which were born in the 60s, came to full bloom in the 70s, and which have infected this country to a greater degree with every wave of children. I laid out for him that the core of our culture and the beliefs that had created a respectful society, the one in which he was raised, comes from conservative and/or Christian belief, and that he has just detailed what liberal views and secularism have wrought.
For a moment he agreed, as there was no other conclusion. But it did two things: indicted his worldview and laid the onus of responsibility for the conditions he abhors (see his mall experience) on Liberalism.
So, he changed the subject, stating that he’d taught his children the Golden Rule, even though he is agnostic. He was unwilling to learn anything or to reconsider his position, even though they have made his later years problematic and have put American on a downhill slide.
To change now would be to indict himself and all he holds dear.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Micky, neither of us know what is fact for sure, but I’ve seen my share of studies and charts showing the red states reliance on entitlements. Unless you’re talking about Medicare and Social Security, which EVERYONE wants as soon as they turn 65.
Baloney Detector: here’s an alternative theory. It’s not lack of religion that has made American youths disrespectful and impolite. It’s the free market Republicans hold so dear. It’s TV, video games, and everything else out there that targets the under 18 market. But we can’t mess with the hallowed invisible hand of the free market, can we?
And btw, I was actually a fan of Romney. Too bad the evangelicals killed his ticket. One group of evangelicals invited Mitt and his wife Anne to a prayer meeting and told them both they were going to hell. So now we have Palin, God help us. And these people create a respectful society?
September 16th, 2008 at 8:58 am
There is also an educational aspect to the problem. More Democrats drop out of high school than Republicans, and more Republicans graduate from college than Democrats.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Oh for goodness’ sake. McCain, if that is true, then what’s all this Republican talk about the Democrat party of Elites, the Ivy League Liberals, the Professorial Obama? What’s the big upset about liberal-dominated academia and liberal control of college campuses?
September 16th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Because liberals dominate in post-graduate education. All the lawyers, college professors, and party insiders are well educated.
The data is very interesting the last two election cycles, and holds in the Gallop polling this year.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Alaska has more government help than any state in the union, and now Caribou Barbie is the poster girl for reform!
Are you Republicans so gullible and uninformed?
September 16th, 2008 at 9:36 am
June, have you never heard of the unconscious? By definition, you would not be conscious of it. Are familiar with this aphorism: If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it’s probably a duck?
You might not consider yourself party to a victim mentality, but liberalism is infused with it. It is typically expressed by wanting to protect other so-called victims. It is a siege mentality with two types: those who need protection, and those who do the protecting. Obama is the latter, and the countless victims he appeals to, the former.
You all want someone to take care of you, or to be the one doing the caring by way of your vote and representative caretakers.
And it comes as no surprise to me that you are liberal. That was patently obvious.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Bebe, another off-topic comment will result in suspension of your commenting privilege.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:58 am
And the unconscious minds of Republicans are, unlike those of liberals, robust with infallible logic and morality? Wow. It must be that apple pie diet you guys live off of.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned today, it’s that the findings of that article are bunk. Conservatives cannot express the liberal point of view any better than liberals can express the conservative point of view. None of you have come close to expressing mine, without resorting to presumptuously dictating the innerworkings of my unconscious mind.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:58 am
June.
Blacks and minorities have all been voting democratic for the last 50 years, where has it got them ?
They are consistantly portrayed as victims upon the presumption that the lib candidate will relieve they’re being victims by giving handouts.
It is a fact. But of course paying attention to voting demographics over the decades wouldnt hurt either.
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have always had a vested interest in maintaining the misperception that blacks can only achieve with government handouts and welfare policies.
Its not about red state or blue state.
Its about the individual mentality of the liberal.
Bebe, you really need to start giving examples and back up your crap and empty one liners.
It’s true that Alaska consistently ranks in the top three states which receive more federal dollars than they pay, and has often been the top state.
A moment’s reflection might help answer why this is so. As The Economist noted back in August of 2006, before Sarah Palin became governor:
There’s a ton of good reasons for Alaska to get the money it gets. It has to support 21,000 troops, it has obligations to Native Alaskans and the Fed owns some 60% of Alaska’s land which it is responsable for and only 1 % of Alaskas land is privately owned.
It also operates the largest coast gaurd of any other state. Its coast lines are greater than that of the east and west coast put together. ( you might want to think national security) It has the largest forest service in the union to maintain also. Combined, mkore than that of Texas and California.
get it ?
So dont try to make it to look as if Alaska is just chock full of welfare brats.
You’re way outta your league here.
Try an arguement once in a while with relative facts
September 16th, 2008 at 10:59 am
June, I dont think McCain was saying he could read your mind.
But libs in general are pretty easy to figure out.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
More pompous conservative windbags without a clue as to what lies in the unconscious minds of liberals. After the collapse of venerable Wall Street “free market” institutions and struggling to win an unjust war, when will the conscious minds of conservatives allow them to see that they are just like bullies in the school yard who are never wrong and want all the marbles. We must share the limited resources on this planet and we liberals are tired of being belittled because we understand that only through cooperation and compromise will we succeed. Greed is NOT good.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
“Now, about that war.
You guys have yet to prove any lies.
You have been saying this for years now, you havnt proved anyone lied, and yet you keep saying it.
Its like that hamster.
You figure if you keep pushing you’ll get there one day and it will be true.
The reason we went to war in the first place was to avoind the results of a threat being unattended to.
Much as was the case with Al Queda and Saddam was beggining to take on a very deceptive nature in his unwillingness to cooperate.
As Bryan pointed out, we all got the same info that lead up to the war.
But somehow now that its not expedient for liberal purposes that info has gone from what everyone percieved as a threat to now being a lie.
Amazing.”
Micky, this is totally, totally wrong. The reason we invaded Iraq was because the world was told that Saddam had 1) WMDs, and 2) links to Al Qaeda. Period. It was not some unspecified threat. Is was this exactly. Collin Powell got up in front of the UN and said so.
It is not true that Saddam was being uncooperative. He cooperated 100% with the UN, and the UN reported they found no evidence of WMDs. We said that we had other info that the UN did not have.
The burden of proof for all of this was on us, and it has turned out that 1) no WMDs have yet been found, and 2) no links between Saddam and Al Qaeda have been found.
Now, these are FACTS. They are the facts of history. 100 years from now, if you open up a history book, this is what you are going to read. You cannot deny it.
It is true we all got the same info in the lead up to the war, but that’s like saying, just because everyone heard something, it therefore had to be true. History since the invasion of Iraq has shown otherwise. It was not true.
Therefore, Bush et. al. were either mistaken or they lied. Now, you seem to not be able to remember that President Bush himself has now admitted the above, but claims we got bad information. The President of the United States has said this; I heard him say it with my own ears. They also have a long justification why it was the right thing to do to invade Iraq, for other reasons, and those reasons are, basically, that Saddam was a bad guy. You can read this document at the White House web site.
So, Bush et. al. were either victims, or incompetent, or liars. They would prefer to be considered victims. I believe neither of the three. I think they had an ulterior motive: Iraq’s oil.
By they way, how is this for understanding how a conservative thinks and trying to argue without letting emotions get in the way? You just won’t admit the facts. Facts are facts. You say something that is just false, and say it and say it and say it, until I guess you just figure you will tire everyone out, and they will give up.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Geez. Lot’s of name-calling. The problem with “getting it” is more than just a psychology issue. It’s also a cultural one. We live apart, read different books, listen to different music, watch different news programs, etc., etc., etc. We don’t need to “get” the other side on a day to day basis because we don’t need to deal with each other.
And then comes an election year, when we’re so surprised by what the other side thinks.
This is a huge advantage to conservatives in a presidential election. Conservatives don’t need to win anyone over to their side to win. The liberals do, and the way they go about trying to convert Conservatives (hurling insults, mocking people they elected as stupid, etc.) simply have not worked. If the two sides don’t “get” each other, advantage McCain.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
why is everything centered?
September 16th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I was just wondering the same thing, about the centering. Anyway. There was another interesting article in the Wall Street Journal three days ago that goes to Ignatius’ last point:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122125912790430149.html
And just because I can’t help it, there’s also an article by (relatively) conservative columnist David Brooks admitting that more Republicans than Mike Murphy and Peggy Noonan are questioning Palin as a choice based on her lack of experience:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/opinion/16brooks.html?hp
So Dems and Reps CAN agree on some things. But Ignatius may be right; the McCain camp may just have the advantage. Or not. I really don’t know what to expect. I don’t trust the polls.