March 21, 2006

Whiny Conservatives The odds are, Shrub was a difficult child. The odds are, he takes after the man his mother claims is his father.
posted by Skrik 18 years ago
  • The social psychologist who criticizes the study in the article is a total moron. He suggests that in Communist China, these whiny kids would become "fervid party members", implying that this shows that whiny people can just as easily "turn left", He fails to consider the context of left versus right in a different political system. Party members in China are just as right-wing and conservative as American Republicans within the context of their own political system. The study shows a preference for conservative behavior -- relying on dogma, authoritarian systems, rejecting change and new ideas, etc. -- not branded ideologies.
  • Well now - seems to me that if you are whiny and insecure then conservative pretends to offer the security you are after - works in Oz anyway. (Suddenly sees the light about a lot of our politics......)Oops negative comment. Interesting tho - local demographics and polling i believe would show the same thing - If the country is 'in times of fear' people (aka 'the populace') tend to be conservative. Vaguely I recall poll outcomes expressing this from WWII although would not be on such a 'following' or personal level. makes sense though in terms of perception.
  • Some days I think it works like this: Some have unpleasant experiences. Everyone tends to look around and see the world's a mess, and that many things are unsatisfactory. Up to that point agreement is usually general. Some would like everything to be the way it used to be in the past. Which is the only place they're sure is safe, because it was safe when they were small, wasn't it? Things then were better, weren't they? Look, we survived, didn't we? Others are unhappy with present and past circumstances. They don't want to participate in the stupidity of making the same mistakes over and over again. So new methods, new ideas appear to offer some relief. Because -- and here they point randomly at something, anything: Just look, this stupid monitor takes up too much room on this desk! Dammit, there must be a better way! It can seem it has always been like this. However, what this study doesn't take into account: people change. Not that everyone will change viewpoints, but some folks actually do. Someone leaves one camp to join another. A grain of sand slides down the face of a dune. Another is blown into the air. And if this goes on long enough, the dune isn't where it was. Because change happens -- automobiles, trees, clouds, parrots, television series, MoFi threads -- things just won't stay the same. It makes it all so hard to get a handle on the current situation! And after all that bustle of change -- oops, the world is still flawed! The sky is still falling. Entropy is still eating everything (how dare it!) Eek! Where are the Safe Places? O whatever shall we do?
  • i recently watched an interesting (though flawed) bbc documentary called "the power of nightmares". it's been mentioned on mofi before. one of the starting points: politicians used to sell use dreams of a better future; more recently they're emphasizing their ability to protect us from nightmares*. *i'd argue that both of these approaches are as old as politics. what we have seen recently is an increase in the emphasis on the nightmares and a large decrease in the emphasis on dreams.
  • Beeswacky - very profound but.. some will always always always blame others for the action they didnt take - and always the blame for where they are will be with someone else (yeah ok bitter and twisted fair comment) ..... Hate myself rite now sound like the conservative from hell and i aint. Oh and safe plkaces are wherever you can still find the disney movies you loved as a kid......Before it all got too hard and you had to be a grownup
  • Hey Briank - it is all about surviving in a world that u don't fit in - In the western world at this point in time it is about being comfortable with conservatism. Seems to me without the benefit of survey that he is right - u go for the norm - the 'whinies' are looking for stability - can't comment on that for the states at the mo - but if u be in oz then u labelled either' chatterati' or conservative - if in China then probably still looking for a safe place in the party line. DIfference between democracy and 'the state'. believe me if u think u got it bad in a free country and really want to promote communism.... give me 60 minutes your doctrine will be destroyed
  • I was a terrible cry baby for almost all my life
  • from Slate: "Criticisms: 1) They did the study in Berkeley. 2) The correlations aren't that strong. 3) They skewed the interpretation, calling moral confidence "rigidity." 4) They overlooked left-wing rigidity. 5) What about the recent Pew study that showed Republicans are happier than Democrats?"
  • I don't fit the demographic. I grew up quiet, confident, introspective, creative, and a strong thinker. Now I'm whiny, insecure, and morally rigid...
  • I whinge. You've been known to complain. And with The Werzog [or other objection of your affection], it's just bitch, bitch, bitch. I'm insecure. You can't be as confident as you look. The Werzog is a paranoid and would be dangerous if he weren't paralyzed with fears. I'm an ethical person. You behave in a way consistent with your beliefs. The Werzog is a raving zealot, a religious fanatic with Underpants Issues. ;]
  • Those criticizing the study seem to overlook the point that it only offers explanation for some people's conservative tendencies. The study merely says that insecure kids tended to become conservatives, not that all conservatives started out as insecure kids. The study offers a very reasonable rationale for why this should occur. I have not read the study first hand though, so I have no idea if the study's basis for arriving at this rationale was reasonable. Similarly, I can think of easy rebuttals to all of Slate's criticisms, but without reading the study I don't know if those criticism's might not still have merit.
  • The study appears to be not statistically or scientifically valid. I think if it showed the opposite result many more people would be pointing that out. Of course, if it showed the opposite result the authours probably wouldn't have published it. Anyway, whiny kids or not...there is little doubt that there have been many changes in our society through the years; some positive and some negative. If the things most important to you have gotten worse in the last few decades, you would long for the 'good old days' and be labeled a social conservative. If the things most important to you have improved, then you would want those changes to continue/progress and be labelled a social liberal. What kind of brat you were has little to do with it.
  • Neither the article nor the researcher are putting this forth as conclusive proof of anything - there's no need for anyone to feel defensive. It does, however, give us some stuff to think about, and maybe do more study on in the future.
  • ... he takes after the man his mother claims is his father. As opposed to his real father--The Evil Oilyman.
  • I think to be a social conservative (in the "if everybody doesn't behave the right way, like me, society is gonna go to hell) you have to be a little insecure. Its called projection. But that doesn't happen when they are children. Its what they are now.
  • Freud would say it all happens when we're children.
  • Dinesh needs to bring the ol' brain into the shop for a major tune-up. What a D'Shithead.
  • Oh yeah, and Bush sucks.