I was wrong about you conservatives
The conservative tendency to label opponents as “unAmerican” or “unpatriotic” has always gotten me a little … angry, shall we say? I’ll even admit I’ve taken it personally. Who gave them or anyone else the right to define what is American and what is not? And what is unpatriotic about opposing a war that in the long term will weaken our country militarily, economically, politically and morally, as the invasion of Iraq has done?
More recently, though, I’ve come to realize that I owe conservatives an apology of sorts. I had long thought that there was something calculated in their approach, that flinging words such as “unAmerican” at their rivals was a conscious and well-thought-out attack strategy, along the lines of Newt Gingrich’s infamous GOPAC memo. I was wrong about that.
Instead, I’ve come to understand that the attack on loyalty is instinctive, and in that sense sincere and genuine. It’s an inherent attitude that helps to define conservatives as conservative, and to define other people as not conservative. Put bluntly, conservatives put a higher value on unquestioned loyalty to country, party, cause and group than nonconservatives do. That is not meant in this context as a criticism, merely as an observation.
Listen to the debate between the Powell wing and the Limbaugh wing of the GOP, for example, and you hear eerily familiar rhetoric and all-too-familiar modes of attack. Once again, you see the same insistence on loyalty to the group, and the same discomfort with dissent or difference.
Instead of claiming that liberals aren’t real Americans, the conservatives claim that moderates aren’t real Republicans. Moderates are described as traitors to the party and the cause, and they are told, in effect, to love the party or leave it. As RNC Chairman Michael Steele said recently, moderates are welcome in the party, but only if they accept the fact they’ll have no influence.
“Understand that when you come into someone’s house, you’re not looking to change it,” he said. “You come in because that’s the place you want to be.”
Over at Redstate.com, Erick Erickson offers an interesting variation on the theme, and in fact takes it to a whole ‘nother level. He equates the disloyalty of Republicans who dare to criticize party leaders such as Rush Limbaugh to the disloyalty shown by Peter to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane.
Yes, he really does.
“Peter denied Christ three times,” Erickson writes. “Our goal should be to not deny Christ and also to not deny the valuable members of our own movement.”
I acknowledge that’s an extreme example. I acknowledge as well that such attitudes are found among liberals as well, if to a lesser degree. Overall, however, the conservative emphasis on group loyalty and the liberal acceptance of dissent help to define the two camps at least as clearly as their positions on taxes or regulation.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
275 comments Add your comment
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:00 pm
Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others. ~Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary
Will Rogers
May 28th, 2009
6:00 pm
Who thinks rape is right. Rape is always wrong. That is why I hated Uday and Qusay Hussein.
Give me a definition of torture. Being made to wear women’s underwear on your head, not torture. Being hung up by your broken arms for days like John McCain, torture. Being forced to listen to rap, unpleasant, not torture.
To be honest on the torture thing here is how I feel. If a terrorist knew the information at what time another terrorist was going to rape your family in front of your eyes. Then the same terrorist was going to slowly cut their heads off while you watched, helplessly. If I had the opportunity to get that information from the other terrorist to stop the second, I would do whatever it took. Of course I would not rape the guy, I am a heterosexual. I would use cattle prods in the shower to get whatever information I could get to save you and your family. If that did not work, there are other methods. The lives of the innocent mean more to me than the lives of the ones who have vowed to kill you, me, your family and my family. That is how I feel. Your not feeling the same way does not influence my belief that you have the right to feel that way if you want.
I hope this helps your understanding of the way I feel. Once again, feel free to think differently.
Greg Mendel
May 28th, 2009
6:00 pm
Cuz (5:34 PM):
Good post — refreshingly reasonable, and actually applies to the majority of people, including most on this blog. Now and then, there are some good discussions here, but not often on politics. Personally, I enjoy discussing politics. I don’t like “arguing” politics because here — as in most situations — arguing politics descends into the relentless loop of demonization and tit-for-tat, out-of-context hyperbolic prattle that inevitably makes every thread the same.
I may have said this before, here, but I think there is a tendency to see those with opposing political views through the prism of extremes, i. e., all conservatives are Rush Limbaugh and all liberals are Bill Ayers. Frankly, I consider myself slightly left of center — the center having moved around over the years. Having seen the comments on several other “liberal” blogs, I find the liberal posters here to be complete slackers compared to the moonbats elsewhere on the Net. The conservatives aren’t that bad, either. Except tor you-know-who. That one’s a Nazi.
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:03 pm
Don’t vote, it only encourages them. – Lestor Maddox
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:04 pm
I am working for the time when unqualified blacks, browns, and women join the unqualified men in running our government. ~Cissy Farenthold
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:04 pm
There are always too many Democratic congressmen, too many Republican congressmen, and never enough U.S. congressmen. ~Author Unknown
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:07 pm
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. ~Aesop
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
6:10 pm
Geez, I wish I got a dollar for every time I’ve been called un-American or unpatriotic by libs on these AJC blogs and I’d be willing to pay 5 dollars for every time I’ve imparted that sentiment on them.
I seem to recall a blurb right here not long ago where Jay B himself was throwing around at least one of those terms, but I don’t recall who he was calling that. I pretty danged sure it wasn’t libs though.
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:10 pm
The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too. ~Oscar Levant
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 28th, 2009
6:11 pm
“I want to speak generally about some reports I’ve witnessed over the past few years in the British media. And in some ways, I’m surprised it filtered down,” Gibbs began. “Let’s just say if I wanted to look up — if I wanted to read a writeup today of how Manchester United fared last night in the Champion’s League cup, I might open up a British newspaper. If I was looking for something that bordered on truthful news, I’m not entirely sure it’d be in the first pack of clips I’d pick up.”
Whining about the British media?
Now that’s a wee bit infantile, you wankers.
Ray
May 28th, 2009
6:22 pm
mike,
I think it’s safe to say Cheney’s daughter didn’t get ‘the gene’ from mama.
Aside from that, don’t you think you whine a little much? Nobody said anything when the right was playing the dirt game, but now that they are losing at the very game they started – here comes mike. You kind of represent the guy who starts it, gets his tail kicked, and then cries about how its unfair.
Very unbecoming.
Greg Mendel
May 28th, 2009
6:25 pm
“The lives of the innocent mean more to me than the lives of the ones who have vowed to kill you, me, your family and my family.” — Will
This is a good example of an issue that seems simple, but isn’t, and grounds for serious discussion instead of argument. As stated verbatim, I feel the same way. My discomfort with the Gitmo situation, along with other prison compounds (including overseas black sites) is that it seems a very significant number of detainees were/are perfectly innocent. Many of them were simply framed for money by their neighbors, circumstances that should have been sorted out years ago.
To me, a responsibility of American patriotism is actually practicing our basic values. Traditionally, we’ve prided ourselves on protecting the innocent. We’ve boasted about it. So, to me, if we’re violating our principles (and lying about it), we aren’t who we claim to be.
I don’t see that as a liberal view. I see it as moral and realistic.
Ray
May 28th, 2009
6:26 pm
Conservatives are undoubtably patriotic, but they’re the cheap version. That’s why they’re all about a fifty cent bumper sticker, but don’t want no part of funding veteran’s benefits.
Tacky.
booger
May 28th, 2009
6:26 pm
Jay, what a condescending, snotty little article you have written.
Just about everyone I know is conservative, and I do not know of one of them who listens to Rush. You see, Rush is an entertainer. He exaggerates his stories much like your little cartoonist Mike exaggerates his characters. He is not a journalist. He is not a politician. Most conservatives undersand this.
As far as critisizing Bush, I was against much of what he did. I know of no one who is in lock step on everything any repub. stands for. I really don’t care about abortion cause I’m not a female. I don’t care if gays want to marry. I don’t go to church although I belong to one.
On the other hand, I really do care about the security of this country. I care deeply about the economy and the mess this admin. is getting it
into. I care about individual rights, and I think the Federal govt. has grown far to big and intrusive.
This label you use to fit all conservatives just doesn’t work except as a liberal talking point.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
6:27 pm
I mean evidence justifying your comparison of my work to that of Limbaugh, Mike.
You know, like, the many times I called female conservatives “femifascists.”
Or the time I said that the only reason the media isn’t dumping on Brett Favre is because he’s white.
Or the time I wrote that I hoped George Bush failed as president.
Or — this was a good one!— the time I wrote about the White House dog, and showed a picture of one of the Bush daughters.
Or the column about how conservatives are really traitors who hate America? Or how conservative women “vote with their vaginas/”
You know… stuff like that.
Oh. And the system flags anything with more than three links as spam, which is probably what happened to your earlier message.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
6:29 pm
“On the other hand, I really do care about the security of this country. I care deeply about the economy and the mess this admin. is getting it
into. I care about individual rights, and I think the Federal govt. has grown far to big and intrusive.”
I don’t doubt any of that for a minute, Booger.
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
6:32 pm
What is this new page design. It should be totally in shades of gray from one side to the other, rather than anything remotely like the black and white of the conservative.
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:32 pm
Vaginas are cool.
Ray
May 28th, 2009
6:36 pm
jt,
Well put. Now, if you could convince the far right of that, the world would be a better place.
getalife
May 28th, 2009
6:38 pm
Arnold: Rush Isn’t GOP’s 800-Pound Gorilla — He’s Down To 650 Pounds.
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:39 pm
Pay no attention to the color scheme. This happens when N.J. Ver.2.0Gov reboots.
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
6:40 pm
Thats the problem with conservatives Jay. Their assertions that if you dont go along with their almost repeatly failed ideas about the best way to keep this nation secure, and the best way to keep its economy healthy and vibrant you supposedly hate this country. This is rather not the case, you simply hate the harm done to this country when their ideas are not kept in check. This occurs over and over again in history, and when it does, what you end up with is a dictatorship of the right, which almost always turns out catastrophically.
The biggest example is their hatred of FDR and the New Deal, but the United States came out of the New Deal the greatest military power on earth when before that, it was someplace behind Belgium in military might. Republicans of course, resisted entering WWII for years, even when it was becoming obvious by 1934 that the world was headed for war if the fascist regimes of Europe and the Japanese Empire were not checked early on. FDR was talking about the need for this in 1934, and the Republicans in Congress as well as famous Republicans in the private arena who had a public voice were not only opposing the war, but raving about how great the Nazi’s were.
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
6:40 pm
Trust me, Jay, no one is comparing you to Rush.
Rush built an entire network and industry by his work. You work for a failing newspaper.
Rush is entertaining. You are mostly tedious.
Rush is an original. You cut and past with the best of them.
Rush is listened to by millions. You have the readership of AJC – ’nuff said.
So don’t worry. We’re not comparing you to Rush, because there is no comparison.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
6:43 pm
Thanks, Dave R. I appreciate it. And I appreciate you coming here repeatedly every day to this boring and tedious site. Downright charitable of you.
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
6:44 pm
You know, N.J., you really should leave the Twilight Zone every now and again.
FDR’s New Deal policies didn’t get us out of the Great Depression. It was that little war we fought beginning December 7, 1941 that did the trick.
The sad thing is, you really believe the stuff you write. . .
Paul
May 28th, 2009
6:45 pm
Dave R
The first sentence “Trust me, Jay, no one is comparing you to Rush.” trumps all.
Quite a compliment, actually.
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
6:46 pm
Jay, YOU’RE boring and tedious. Your posters provide the entertainment.
Now, if you’d cut and paste less and tell us your own thoughts more, YOU might just be less tedious.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
6:47 pm
So is the argument here supposed to be that all conservatives are trash talking scum because of some things Limbaugh has said and all liberals are shiny happy people that would never so much as utter the slightest of slurs because Jay B hasn’t done the exact things as Limbaugh but in reverse?
Just when you don’t think libs can get any more ridiculous……..
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:47 pm
Jay- I enjoy disagreeing with you.
And speaking of vaginas-
N.J.- No Innovations from the South?
What about air conditioning, Coca-Cola, and the Blues?
Yank.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 28th, 2009
6:48 pm
Much tweekishness going on!
mike, babe, listen….
you are correct. some “commie, pinko, 200 ton libs, with wretched lonely lives, socialist, baby killer, america haters” are serious when they question the patriotism of those who wish for secession ’cause they don’t like what most of the rest of us DO like. (I am one of them.) No matter what you think I think, or know I know – I still only use it to tweek. It is apparently effective. One can tweek with the truth….I don’t have to tell jokes about yo’ mama.
How many times in the last 50 years have liberals and progressives been told “America – Love It or Leave It”? You may have noticed we did not leave. Hell,we never even talked about it.
You guys and gals are a different story. A few tough elections, and some of the loud fringe want to go all “Jeff Davis” on us.
That is not patriotic. That’s chicken-dookey, school yard bully, delusions of granduer silliness.
But I digress.
The question I thought was volume/quantity. If you honestly believe
that in the “question the America-ness” department, the the left wing was ever in the same league as the right – I would not want your gene pool anywhere near my family.
Other than that, have a nice evening.
mike
May 28th, 2009
6:49 pm
Jay –
Oh please.
Of course, you didn’t call anyone feminazis etc, etc. You target conservatives.
Likewise, Limbaugh never accused Westmoreland of racism, claimed that questioning one’s patriotism is solely the realm of conservatives or repeatedly called Bush and Cheney liars.
All of that being said, if you are really offended by the types of comments made by Limbaugh, why not call out Keith (”Bush is a fascist”) Olbermann or Jeneane (tax protesters are racist rednecks) Garafolo or Bill (”America would be better off if Cheney was assassinated”) Maher? The fact that all of your contempt is showered exclusively on conservative pundits demonstrates that your sense of moral indignation takes a back seat to your partisanship.
Thanks for the heads-up on the problem with my posts. I figured it was something along those lines.
You are both the same in your strident partisanship and in your need to accuse those who don’t share your views as immoral, unintelligent or both.
getalife
May 28th, 2009
6:50 pm
dave is very happy with a radio entertainer as his leader.
Poor dave.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
6:50 pm
Sorry getalife, I was helping my family.
Rape is wrong and a violation of the innocent.
Torture is something I would rather not use, but if it saved one innocent life and is used on someone that is no doubt guilty, say caught in the act. Then I have no problem with it. Sort of like if someone broke into my house to rape my children. They would be leaving my house toes up. I have guns secreted throughout my house. And yes they are out of the reach of children. I have no desire to shoot anyone that is not assaulting me, you, your family, my family. But I would pull the trigger if I had to to save an innocent. And I respectively understand those who cannot.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
6:51 pm
So what did I do wrong that time? With the stuff that comes through maybe my comments are too clean, although I could have activated a little adjective screener that kicks in when you string together about a dozen of them.
Jay B,
You really need to give us the magic word list.
Paul
May 28th, 2009
6:52 pm
Mrs. Godzilla
[[How many times in the last 50 years have liberals and progressives been told “America - Love It or Leave It”? You may have noticed we did not leave. Hell,we never even talked about it.]]
I do remember reading about a group of young adults, during the Vietnam War, went door to door with a petition that went on about the rights of the people, oppressive governments, what should be done to change it, etc. Hardly got a signature. Heard a lot of ‘love it or leave it’ as well as “@!##%# hippies” and a few assorted epithets.
They told their teacher that yes, in fact, most Americans seemed entirely unfamiliar with the Declaration of Independence.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 28th, 2009
6:53 pm
Jay
APPLAUSE! APPLAUSE!
Well said dude!
getalife
May 28th, 2009
6:56 pm
Cuz,
The answer is ,
It is wrong.
Thanks for playing.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
6:57 pm
RW,
Maybe the spam filter is set on “werewolf”
Paul
May 28th, 2009
6:58 pm
Midori
A Twilight fan runs the spam filter?
jt
May 28th, 2009
6:59 pm
Cuz- Way to go with that quote.-
.” They would be leaving my house toes up. I have guns secreted throughout my house”
Now you have the Federal “Carnivore” system activated on this blog. It will slow everything down.
In the future, try not to mention the G word.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
7:00 pm
Paul!!
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
7:02 pm
Mrs. G., the problem you refuse to accept with the difference between those of us who would rather “do a Jeff Davis” is because when you liberals didn’t agree with what was going on (and yes, some of you DID talk about leaving after Bush was elected), at least you still had all the freedoms you had before – you just disagreed with policy.
No one took away your freedom to earn whatever you were capable of earning, or build something without being told how to build it by the Government, or to live within nature because it is the right thing to do, not be mandated by an oppressive Government as to how you may do it. No one took away your property and gave it to someone else without your consent.
What is happening now is that this government is taking away freedoms from the individual, and those freedoms will never come back because there are too many people in this country who want what they did not earn from those they can now control through their elected representatives. The only way to get them back is to split this country into those who want freedom, and those who do not. You are too comfortable with Government taking over every aspect of your life for many of us.
The mere fact that you are not only comfortable with this change, but encourage it, is repugnant to those who desire nothing more than to live free from Government intervention. It is something you will never understand.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
7:03 pm
Midori,
I think it was because I put liberals and happy in the same sentence.
@@
May 28th, 2009
7:03 pm
I’ll be honest, jay, I’ve never understood this need to defend Rush, Newt, Anne (sp?), Sean, Bill O or any other political pundit. If they needed support, they’d be democrats.
It’s the principles found in conservatism that appeal to me. They’ve proven sound over time. Progressive principles seem to be forever fleeting.
I’ll take a government/political party who places confidence in its people, not a people who places their confidence in a government.
Ray
May 28th, 2009
7:04 pm
Dave R,
You might just be the man to make Manteats hard again! Wow! Get a room!
jt
May 28th, 2009
7:08 pm
Dave R- In regard to your quote-
“from those they can now control through their elected representatives. The only way to get them back is to split this country into those who want freedom, and those who do not.”
There might be hope for freedom loving people like us. I’ve been hearing about this for a coupla years now
http://futurismic.com/2009/05/26/a-life-on-the-ocean-wave-more-seasteading-concepts/
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
7:09 pm
Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
John Stuart Mill
Winston Churchill
May 28th, 2009
7:13 pm
If you are not a liberal in your youth, you have no soul.
If you are not a conservative in your middle ages, you have no brain.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
7:14 pm
RW, if I could I would. I don’t have such a list myself. The spam filter works by its own logic; we can add terms to it, but I have no idea why it does what it does sometimes,
Jay
May 28th, 2009
7:17 pm
I just cleared four comments out of the filter and have no idea why they were there. My apologies, folks.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:18 pm
Thanks getalife, my pleasure to play the game. I just disagree with your analysis, I prefer my own.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:20 pm
Jay thanks for the forum. I find it more fun to disagree without trying to be disagreeable. Although I admit, I have my moments.
Paul
May 28th, 2009
7:21 pm
Winston
Given you were defeated in 1945, right after the war, and that the British wanted a series of reforms, including National Healthcare, later an expansion of mass transit and such, well, it seem understandable you were defeated, adhering to a philosophy out of touch with the majority of the citizenry, doesn’t it?
Oh, and thanks for he recommendation of Hine cognac.
But you really should have tried Citadelle over Plymouth. The French do get some things right -
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:25 pm
Lady Astor: Mr. Churchill if you were my husband I would put poison in your tea.
Winston Churchill: Lady Astor, if I was your husband, I would drink it.
And we think some of us are hateful.
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
7:26 pm
Actually most government before this one took away freedoms because they were able to concentrate whatever form of wealth that was the basis for wealth in their time into a small number of hands.
The founders very quickly noticed that there were two things that had to exist in any society which determined how free or tyranical the governments of such societies were.
The first was extremes of poverty and wealth
The second was entrenched (hereditary or organizational) wealth.
Which was why the founders were all vehemently opposed to the idea of both landed and monied aristocracies.
The beleived that everyone was entitled to property and not this alone, but that everyone was BORN with a right to an equal amount of property as anyone else, and that it was civilization that robbed a person of the amount of property that they were naturally entitled to. Which was why every one of them attempted to come up with a system by which the government would pay everyone a stipend for the amount of property that civilization denied them. Franklin wrote the most at length about this, followed by Jefferson, Madison and even Adams got in on the game. Hamilton, having been born in the Carribean on the island of Nevis, had lot of aspirations towards rising towards the British aristocracy which was a lot harder back then than today, had a decided desire to create a sort of American aristocracy based on money and upper class education. Explains a lot about the attitude that got him shot and killed in a duel. Hamilton was also brought to court on morals charges to remove him from office because he was having an affair with a married woman, but the court ruled that personal life cannot have legal bearing on a persons place in government,whether elected or appointed. However Hamilton resigned from his cabinet position anyway, tired of having his personal life scrutinized by his political adversaries
But to put it simply, the founders beleived that the more the wealth was spread around, the less possible it would be for a tyranny or a dictatorship would. Basically this holds true even today. Its a basic tenet that before most nations can develop some form of democratic representative government, they need a large enough middle class, a threshold at which wealth is spread around enough to dilute the power of the wealthy, and to remove the necessity that the poor have to spend all of their time, efforts, and attention on mere sustanance.
Paul
May 28th, 2009
7:27 pm
Jay
You may want to catch a rerun of Meghan McCain on Colbert. No wonder the Old Guard doesn’t care for her. She could actually attract some young adults to the party.
I did like her comment to Colbert (who seemed surprised) about gay marriage. It was along the lines of “If the Republican Party would get back to its core principle of little government interference in our lives, why would they want to get involved with marriage?”
Pleasant evening, all -
TnGelding
May 28th, 2009
7:28 pm
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
7:02 pm
You’re looking at a half-empty glass and saying it is completely empty. Whereas we see it half full.
The government had to step in to save the banking system from imploding worldwide. Time will tell how successful it has been, but eventually things will return to near normal.
http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2009/012209finmkt.htm
@@
May 28th, 2009
7:29 pm
Obama — “When Sonia was nine, her father passed away,” Obama said Tuesday when introducing Sotomayor at the White House “And her mother worked six days a week as a nurse to provide for Sonia and her brother–who is also here today, is a doctor and a terrific success in his own right. But Sonia’s mom bought the only set of encyclopedias in the neighborhood, sent her children to a Catholic school called Cardinal Spellman out of the belief that with a good education here in America all things are possible.”
That’ll come back to haunt him since he doesn’t support school vouchers for low-income families.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:32 pm
Paul, Churchill was defeated before the end of the war. The elections of 1945 were held after VE day but before VJ day. Don’t forget he was also against India gaining it’s freedom. He hated Ghandi.
Kamchak
May 28th, 2009
7:33 pm
jt
Are we supposed to pay higher insurance premiums to cover the cost of insuring these floating cities? I mean it really is a cool concept, but the ocean is an extreme environment. Multi-national insurance companies will want to hedge their losses.
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
7:35 pm
Non political questions to determine how conservative or liberal a person is:
If you want to tell whether someone is conservative or liberal, what are a couple of completely nonpolitical questions that will give a good clue?
How’s this: Would you be willing to slap your father in the face, with his permission, as part of a comedy skit?
And, second: Does it disgust you to touch the faucet in a public restroom
******************************************************
Studies suggest that conservatives are more often distressed by actions that seem disrespectful of authority, such as slapping Dad. Liberals don’t worry as long as Dad has given permission.
Likewise, conservatives are more likely than liberals to sense contamination or perceive disgust. People who would be disgusted to find that they had accidentally sipped from an acquaintance’s drink are more likely to identify as conservatives.
The upshot is that liberals and conservatives don’t just think differently, they also feel differently. This may even be a result, in part, of divergent neural responses…
A study by Diana Mutz of the University of Pennsylvania found that when people saw tight television shots of blowhards with whom they disagreed, they felt that the other side was even less legitimate than before.
The larger point is that liberals and conservatives often form judgments through flash intuitions that aren’t a result of a deliberative process. The crucial part of the brain for these judgments is the medial prefrontal cortex, which has more to do with moralizing than with rationality. If you damage your prefrontal cortex, your I.Q. may be unaffected, but you’ll have trouble harrumphing.
One of the main divides between left and right is the dependence on different moral values. For liberals, morality derives mostly from fairness and prevention of harm. For conservatives, morality also involves upholding authority and loyalty — and revulsion at disgust.
Some evolutionary psychologists believe that disgust emerged as a protective mechanism against health risks, like feces, spoiled food or corpses. Later, many societies came to apply the same emotion to social “threats.” Humans appear to be the only species that registers disgust, which is why a dog will wag its tail in puzzlement when its horrified owner yanks it back from eating excrement.
Psychologists have developed a “disgust scale” based on how queasy people would be in 27 situations, such as stepping barefoot on an earthworm or smelling urine in a tunnel. Conservatives systematically register more disgust than liberals.
To see how you do, take the entire test at:
http://www.yourmorals.org
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/opinion/28kristof.html?_r=3
This might take some time to get into. Since Nicholas Kristoff put this up today, the amount of people attempting to get into the site today is huge.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
7:37 pm
RW,
I’m happy to be a liberal.
getalife
May 28th, 2009
7:37 pm
Cuz,
You proved my theory.
There is a reason they are illegal and carry long prison sentences.
Sane folks know it is wrong.
I rest my case.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
7:38 pm
being that my comment went thru, Wolfie, methinks you need to go back to the drawing board.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
7:40 pm
Thanks Jay
jt
May 28th, 2009
7:41 pm
Kamchak- You wrote-
“Multi-national insurance companies will want to hedge their losses.”
Multi-national insurance companies will most definetly NOT be welcome.
A true libertarian society will not need such scams.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:43 pm
Who or what are illegal. Hard to understand your answer if you do not clarify it.
But I am glad I proved your theory. Just trying to help.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
7:43 pm
Midori,
If you reread my 7:03 you’ll see I already tested that theory, assuming I’m the one you’re calling wolfie. Funny how you used to get bent out of shape when my pet name for you came from the animal kingdom though.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:44 pm
Midori, I am happy you are happy.
jt
May 28th, 2009
7:47 pm
N.J.-
If you damage your prefrontal cortex, your I.Q. may be unaffected, but you’ll have trouble harrumphing.
Now we know what happened to you.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:49 pm
Another great Churchill quote: A prisoner of war is a man who trys to kill you and fails and then asks that you not kill him.
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
7:50 pm
Gelding, my point is that you keep drinking out of my glass when I don’t want you to and it is now more than half empty.
And you use the power of Government to make me keep providing you drink when I don’t want to.
You need to provide your own drink and glass for yourself, and I’ll do the same for me.
And if you can’t provide the glass nor the drink, ask your neighbor politely for one or the other, instead of asking the Government to take mine from me.
Kamchak
May 28th, 2009
7:51 pm
jt
Construction requires an expenditure of capital. Unless these cities are built entirely on private resources, capital must be raised through bonds or equity (stocks)–in either case, insurance is a given.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
7:51 pm
RW,
me bent out of shape? naw.
you know I adore your names, pet.
@@
May 28th, 2009
7:51 pm
NJ:
The fact that Ms. Muntz would have a father representing government causes me to wonder.
I have no problem with germs. I find that liberals are more inclined in that regard. Pandemics scare the hell out of them. Wanna know why the CDC isn’t protecting them. Food contamination? Why isn’t the FDA doing their job?
I’ll let you know how I do on the test.
Midori
May 28th, 2009
7:52 pm
right back atcha, Cuz.
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
7:54 pm
Nope, this has more to do with conservatives having a knee jerk reaction to stuff based on the neurological equivalent of the appendix. They register disgust in situations where there are no reasons to do so.
I have to admit the first time I voted, I voted for Gerry Ford because I felt sorry for the way he was being treated in the media, both for his being clumsy because he was left handed, and because of the smeared end of the stick he had been handed when he took over for Nixon.
Republicans unfortunately dont have evolved enough brains. Even rats take care of their elderly and sick. Conservatives tend to have not evolved to the point that almost all species have. They dont merely look after self interest, but realize that self interest is intrically connected with the entire species.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
7:54 pm
NJ I answered no on both the two pre-test questions. Does that make me a flaming moderate or a libertarian?
If you drink after someone and the drink has alcohol in it, doesn’t that kill the germs anyway?
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
8:07 pm
He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
8:09 pm
I gotta admit, some of those on the left here have also gotten knee-deep in the namecalling and over-the-top attacks….
jt
May 28th, 2009
8:09 pm
Kamchak-
“Unless these cities are built entirely on private resources,”
That is the way it will be. I take it that you never read “Atlas Shrugged”. You wrote-
“capital must be raised through bonds or equity (stocks”
Your mind and labor is a perpetual source of capital. And it is free.
jt
May 28th, 2009
8:12 pm
Did the Dept of Homeland Stupidity grab Taxpayer too?
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 28th, 2009
8:17 pm
“Have gotten?”
N.J,
May 28th, 2009
8:20 pm
Yes, conservatives love to quote Churchill, but when he took office, Britain was still an imperial superpower with the greatest navy on the planet, and an empire that the sun never set on. One quarter of the entire land mass of the globe was colored in British pink, pink being the color on maps and globes that represented the United Kingdom and all the nations that were its colonies or parts of its commonwealth.
The Conservative Churchill presided over the fall of Britain as a world power and the Liberal FDR presided over the United States becomin the SENIOR power in the non communist bloc.
Its a rather good point to take note of.
As a peacetime Prime Minister, Churchill performed dismally and had he simply stopped his political career after WWII, his record, at least to the British, would not have the stain on it that his peacetime rule placed on it. After becoming Prime Minister again in 1951, his inability to handle a peacetime economy bereft of a colonial economy to support his nations needs, he resigned from the Prime Ministers office in 1955 before his term had ended as a result of the stroke caused by the pressures of actually running a government when there was no crisis going on. It is easier to inspire a nation to pull together when it is under attack, than it is to do so when there is no such external threat and its just day to day life. Like most conservatives, Churchill didnt like looking too far ahead. But by no stretch of the imagination could one call Churchill a “small government conservative”. His brands of Toryism was rather a foreshadowing of the big government Republicans of the current neo-conservative breed.
Churchills ideas about the role of conservative government would almost completely agree with the neo-conservative PNAC document. The need to project national power worldwide, in the interests of ones own government is not an inexpensive venture.
Churchill would have been completely conforable with PNAC, as long as it applied to the British Empire as stated by neo cons in 1997:
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests…
PNAC states its aim to “remind America” of “lessons” learned from American history, drawing the following “four consequences” for America in 1997:
we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
[and]
we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
Basically this PNAC is “Britania Rules the Waves” as applied to the United States. That is to say, the idea of projecting American power in America’s interests, rather than setting up a policy in which nations work together for MUTUAL interests is what current neo-cons, and what Churchills style of conservatism called for.
It neglects one thing. There are some nations that would not mind working in mutual interests, but they would be disinclined to work for American interests at the expense of their own. And this is why neo cons have moved from cooperation with other countries to the idea of “Co-ercive Democracy” or foring Democracy on a nation whether it wants it or not.
This become even more costly and requires even LARGER government, and there is no way around it.
Its also why PNAC finally fell apart as something that influenced America policy in 2006. It lasted from 1997 until 2006 and the policy itself was largely responsible for Democrats winning Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008. The means to assert coercive democracy in American interests was responsible for huge government deficits, a bloated national debt, and little return that the average America could see in their own daily life.
Obama could spend as much as Reagan and the two Bushes put together, and because most of it would be spent in local communities, where Americans could actually see what they were getting for it, and there would be little of the catastrophic effect that the conservative expendatures have caused on the Republicans public image.
For all the American public knows, the trillions of national debt added by Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 were flushed down some huge international toilet, with no visible results. Obama could spend the same trillions, and its effects will eventually be seen in every city, town and village in the country.
This pretty much is wha
Jay
May 28th, 2009
8:24 pm
Whiner, don’t even pretend, not for a moment.
Just don’t. You are a man who clearly knows no embarrassment, but still…
getalife
May 28th, 2009
8:26 pm
Keith is stealing my stuff.
He asks:
Is rush crazy?
Um….
Midori
May 28th, 2009
8:35 pm
you’re watching him too, Getalife?
Great show!!
I loved the segment on Rove. What a delusional, ignorant putz.
Jessie V is coming up
I Rule You :-) / You Whine :-(
May 28th, 2009
8:38 pm
bookman- Get real.
Your merry band of liberals has yet to say one intelligent thing between them, over a million comments served, all whiny and angry outbursts. Now you wanna pretend they were recently forced into it?
Come out of that bubble.
Jay
May 28th, 2009
8:40 pm
oh my.
The man talks of “over a million comments served, all whiny and angry outbursts,” and then accuses someone ELSE of being in a bubble.
Alrighty then.
getalife
May 28th, 2009
8:41 pm
Midori,
Yeah, Jesse wants to water board Hannity too.
Goes after the dems for not prosecuting.
“There is no right in torture”
Thanks Jesse.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
8:49 pm
What a shocka!!! getalife and Midori both watching Olberman?? Who’d a thunk it.
I am a little surprised that Midori realizes what a delusional, ignorant putz KO is though.
Cuz
May 28th, 2009
8:50 pm
getalife, who or what is illegal? I asked the question earlier to try and understand your answer.
There is a reason they are illegal and that is why they carry long prison sentences. Sane folks know it is wrong. I rest my case.
What case are you presenting? Are you saying guns are illegal, rape is definitely illegal, free thought is illegal, what the heck are you saying? Clarity would be appreciated.
I Rule You :-) / You Whine :-(
May 28th, 2009
8:52 pm
Try to stick to the subject, would ya, we’re talking about people that are actually watching Keith Blowberman, probably the ONLY people watching Blowberman, and at the same time, obsessing over Limbaugh and Hannity.
Much as I try, I cannot imagine a more angry scenario.
Oops, you aren’t watching Blowberman too, are you?
getalife
May 28th, 2009
8:53 pm
Enter your comments here
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
8:54 pm
Jay needs to provide free replacement keyboard mice to every user who burned theirs out scrolling past N.J.’s posts.
I’d provide my own, but thanks to you libs on this site, I’m learning how to leech off others.
Jay, you owe me a new mouse, man, for not properly policing N.J.!
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
8:54 pm
That’s right Andy. It’s all your fault that the libs can’t control their angry outbursts. Just like it has been for however many years we’ve all been posting here aat the AJC. It’s pretty amazing that you did this to them on day one at ml’s and they still get away with blaming you though. How many years before somebody should have to take responsibility for their own actions?
What am I saying….they’re libs after all so the answer is they never have to.
getalife
May 28th, 2009
8:55 pm
What was the question I asked you Cuz?
Try to keep up.
Dave R
May 28th, 2009
8:55 pm
Man, this is fun playing the victim card!
Kamchak
May 28th, 2009
8:56 pm
jt
Yes, I have read “Atlas Shrugged”–and “The Fountainhead”, “We, the Living” and “Anthem.” While I consider them to be good books, I don’t confuse them with sound economic theory. While we are on pop culture references, I would recommend an episode of the animated series “South Park.” It’s an episode where the character Cartman buys an amusement park believing that he would have the park to himself, ergo, no lines to stand in. Of course he was wrong. I took this episode as a metaphor for those who worship at the altar of Rand. Her work is entertaining, albeit infected with verborrhea. I mean really–page after page of John Galt’s radio address. It’s the same with Howard Roark’s courtroom performance. By the time we get to these scenes in the book, Ms. Rand has clubbed us over the head with these same points. Kinda anticlimactic at that point. Still as romantic novels “AS” an “TF” were good reads. Ironic that strong willed women needed heroic figures to “complete” them.
RW-(the original)
May 28th, 2009
8:58 pm
Dave R,
They used to install all sorts of insane filters over at luckovich’s blog for no apparent reason, but one that they installed was a 2500 character limit for a comment. That filter’s return would be a welcome sight.
I’m frankly surprised that Chadly doesn’t get chided to get his own blog the way Andy always used to.