*“A study funded by the United States Government has concluded that conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in “fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity”.
And if that was not enough to get right-wingers’ blood boiling, the report’s four authors linked Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and the American talkshow host, Rush Limbaugh. *
<snip>
The authors also peer into the psyche of President George Bush, who turns out to be a textbook case. The telltale signs are his preference for moral certainty and frequently expressed dislike of nuance.”
Yeee-Hawwww. They’re all barking. I newed it!
Question: Given that;
[ul]
[li]US politics is (in the general run), at one extreme of the spectrum, as understood in the industrialised world (Communism being att he other)[/li][li]That the US has currently more conventional military power than any single nation in the history of the world (and isn’t afraid to use it outside of international law)[/li][li]That recent events demonstrate the President may avoid Constitution by using Executive Powers[/li][/ul]
Would it be in the interests of the people of the US for those seeking the Presidency to be psychologically assessed and/or for President to be regularly assessed, especially given the possibility that actions by one president may be revenged after he leaves office (‘the sins of the father’, as it were) absenting any democractic remedy ?
Who would do the assessment, and how would that information be used? I’m certain that you could find some “conservative” psychologist who would tell you that Liberals are pathologically weak, and unable to defend the country in times of crisis because of their inability to take decisive action (without first consulting everyone in the world) and their unwillingness to allow even one person to face physical danger.
Sure, but that assessment is the job of the voters, not some government-appointed psychiatrist. You may recall that Thomas Eagleton, a well-qualified Senator, was removed as VP candidate when it came out that he had been given shock treatments because he suffered from depression. In my opinion, Nixon’s sanity led to big problems for him and for the country.
But, there’s no way to get a pure, unbiased professional evaluation of someone’s psyche. The professions of psychiatry and psychology aren’t anywhere near that point. A Republican shrink is apt to find problems with Gore’s psyche, while a Democratic shrink might consider Bush a lunatic.
Now hold on just a durn tootin’ minute there. From whence does one get that particular ‘given’? What extreme are we talking about here? Extreme enfranchisement? Extreme centrism? Extreme voter apathy? Extreme bi-partisanship?
If you are trying to say ‘extreme conservatism’, I can think of far more likely candidates; adherents of France’s Front Nationale, par example.
Well, given (hmm, that term again) that in my expericence Americans more often than not seem to embrace “moral certainty” at the expense of “nuance”, I’ll submit that GWB is in fact the highest expression of the Will of the People. As horrifying as that prospect is to me.
I’ll just note here that the above comments are meant with the precise degree of seriousness expressed by the OP.
Clearly the author of your linked article, London C., is stretching to massage his facts into a conclusion. I suspect that your guy is looking at the same report that elucidator threw out in the Pit a week or so ago. That discussion showed that conservatism is not a pathology, merely a personality disorder on the order of what use to be called a passive-aggressive personality disorder. That discussion also demonstrated that conservatives do not suffer teasing or humor not of the slap-stick and pratt fall variety practiced by Lucille Ball.
The problem is not Conservatives of the traditional sort (also called Country Club Republicans–the sort of people who think their duty consists of avoiding taxes and shirking military service). The problem is the newly powerful Neo-conservatives (as opposed to Paleo-conservatives) like our President and his cabal who really are imperialists of the same sort as Napoleon III. Are they crazy? No, there are just determined to extend American economic domination by military means if necessary and to limit if not dismantle the New Deal social welfare and progressive tax system. The No-cons, it seems to me, genuinely believe (and believe with the sublime confidence of a Christian holding four aces) that the world was created for their benefit and that it is the duty and obligation of government to make sure that they are not inconvienced in the pursuit of wealth and comfort.
It’s not psychology, it’s just ordinary arrested development.
And please provide a cite for your assertion that the President can avoid the Constitution via executive order.
If you are thinking that the President attacked Iraq without a declaration of war, you seem to forget that the President is also the sole commander in cheif of the armed forces. Congress authorized the adventure in Iraq. There was no constitutional violation.
I understand some people think Bush shouldn’t have invaded Iraq. But just because he invaded Iraq and you don’t like it doesn’t make it unconstitutional.
2)What makes conservatives think they can neutralize any criticism by simply saying “Yeah, but liberals…”? Is there never any self-examination among conservatives? Can we never stick to the subject of examining conservative attitudes without changing the subject to liberals?
3)You reduced liberalsm to one narrow issue and presented it with exagerrated hyperbole. Same old black-and-white thinking. Not everyone who would criticize conservatives fits into your stereotype of “liberals”. Ever hear of moderates and centrists? Ever hear of objectivity?
4)Calling liberals “pathologically weak” is quite a swith from a couple years ago when “liberals” were a threat to "freedom"with their penchant for “Big Government”.
5)I await a competent scientific evaluation of liberalism and would happily concede to any valid criticism (then again, there’s liberals and there’s me. My identity is not tied up in that term), but don’t count your confirmed stereotypes before they’re hatched. Besides, there is much more diversity among non-conservative than among conservatives.
6)Your characterization of security/foreign policy issues is absurdly lacking in nuance. There are big differences between intellignece, border security, Afghanistan, and Iraq (and Clinton’s military adventures for good measure) and liberals respond accordingly. I supported the Iraq war FWIW, but I still think conservatives are a buncha jerks, and now I have scientific evidence.
*** “That discussion also demonstrated that conservatives do not suffer teasing or humor not of the slap-stick and pratt fall variety practiced by Lucille Ball”.* ~ Spavined Gelding**
On the other hand you Liberals have a exquisite sence of humor. Listen to these zingers…
(you conservatives) "Ever hear of objectivity?"
Ha ha.
"That recent events demonstrate the President may avoid the Constitution by using Executive Powers".
Ha ha ha.
*** “but I still think conservatives are a buncha jerks, and now I have scientific evidence”.**
Ha ha ha. Stop it , you guys are killing me. Scientific evidence? Ha ha ha, you clowns, I haven’t laughed so hard in years.
"The Neo-cons genuinely believe (and believe with the sublime confidence of a Christian holding four aces) that the world was created for their benefit and that it is the duty and obligation of government to make sure that they are not inconvienced in the pursuit of wealth and comfort."
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha These are hilarious ! You guys oughta get your own political comedy spot on TV. You know…like Dennis Miller. Ha ha ha ha ha ___Ha!
Conservatives believe that the Government should not help the poor. A Government that helps its people is the kind of Government we need. Conservatives say its takeing away freedoms, but it is really giveing more freedoms to those who are very poor. The poor live horrible lives with all the crime and poverty, you cannot raise a family off of minimum wage, and its not always easy to get a job. Its very easy to get yourself killed. Because the poor areas get such bad education, its extremely hard for them to get out of that position, contrary to what Conservatives say. They should not be forced to live like this, the Government should help these poor people. The filthy rich don’t use nearly all their money, they can afford a Leftist Government and stay rich. How ever, Conservatives reject any idea that would help out these suffering people. Conservatives believe the poor are just a bunch of lazy bumbs. This is not true, its hard to work your way out of the rat hole. Conservatives don’t want the wealthy to pay a dime to help these people. As the poor suffer in life, Conservatives yell out “Communist!” to anyone who speaks out against what we are letting these people go through .
Environment
The Environment is in danger. As industry rapes our Earth of its beauty. Conservatives call anybody who speaks against the destruction of the environment “dumbass environmental hippies”. Conservatives don’t care that millions of acres of beautiful forests are being chopped down every breath you take. How heartless can people get? They think that extra money for wealthy business is more important than the forests which are home for many animals! Humans should not be given the right to tear down our Environment and murder millions of animals and even cause extinction. We should protect what remains of our planet for our future generations. Conservatives however say otherwise. How heartless can people be, to believe that we should rip our planet and kill animals that get in our way so wealthy industries can get even richer? Its unfortunate that nearly half(if not more) of Americans don’t give a rats ass about our Environment, which me and many other Liberals charish.
Forests aren’t the only issue however. Conservatives(George W. Bush being more specific) don’t want to research renewable and cleaner energy. Oil is limited and mineing it and useing it is slowing destroying our planet. We should use sources of energy that are more abuntant(sp?). Conservatives however don’t care about better sources of energy and they continue to purchase tanking SUVs that guzzle up gas like a monster.
Social Views
Conservatives can be very heartless when it comes to these views. Many Conservatives believe that homosexuals, minorities, and sometimes even women, are inferior beings of life. That is clearly speaking out Nazism. People should be treated equally. White Male Christians should not get special and better treatment than everybody else. Homosexuals should not be prevented from getting married because they are people to and should be treated fairly. Many Conservatives however think Homosexuals are evil. Homophobia is just like Racism. I don’t know if I gave this Paragraph that correct title but oh well…
Intolerance
Cosnervatives are often intolerant of other ethnics and beliefs. Conservatives spew out tons of hate towards people who have different views than they do. Conservatives call Liberals “Worthless Communists!” http://www.avoiceofone.com/mt/archives/000026.html . Conservatives say Liberals are the most undereducated people in the world, even though Liberals are clearly the more educated. Conservatives are arrogant and act like they are soooo smart, even thought they are usually just a bunch of mindless sheep. Conservatives say Liberals are immature and need to grow up. However its Conservatives who act like children. We Liberals are the more mature. Conservatives are just so stuck-up and hateful its sickens me. I assume every Conservatives is an asshole until I find out otherwise. If I do I will like them anyway. Most Conservatives would refuse to be freinds with anyone that is Liberal, Homosexual, Hippie, etc… Conservatives should learn how to debate without getting so damn personal.
It would seem to be too late to respond to this with a firm “No, thank you.”
What?
As a conservative, I reject this assertion. We think they are a bunch of lazy bums who can’t spell.
Stick around - perhaps I can show you.
What! Animals live in the forest! Did I miss a memo?
Well, that darn deer jumped right in front of my car, but I don’t think Monsanto made a dime off it. The repair shop, sure, but that is a local business.
Obviously more that you do spelling.
At any rate, could I have a cite on your figure that half of Americans don’t care about the environment? Or did you simply make that up?
But I want to fast-forward to my favorite part of your post.
Followed by this gem -
I await your next screed with considerable eagerness.
Didn’t I just take to task the habit of deflecting criticism of conservatives by pointing the finger at liberals rather than addressing it. Is objectivity a strong characteristic of conservatism or isn’t it?
Me:
Milum:
That was pretty much just a wisecrack, a throwaway line. I knew I’d catch it for that and I should’ve put a smilely after it. But is that all you got in responding to my post? Did the OP refer to a scientific study or didn’t it? And are conservatives a buncha jerks or aren’t they?
Milum, your post contains absolutely nothing of substance.
Welcome to the SDMB Morfos. I think your post is a wee bit hyperbolic. But for crying out loud, nobody respond by saying “Yeah, but liberals…”. Respond by saying “You’ve got conservatives all wrong” and back it up.
Shodan, your post also contains very little substance, with one exception. Instead, you simply quoted Morphos’ post at length and nitpicked the spelling.
So sqweels, care to prove any of your assertions? Care to prove that conservatives are more likely to have “Yeah, but…” arguments than liberals? Frankly, your arguments are pathetic.
Have you looked at the actual study? The article linked to by elucidator (I believe) had a much more in depth summary of the study at hand.
The “researchers” did not look at liberal thought and compare it. For all they know, the exact same set of broad neuroses are exhibited in liberal thought - but that was never examined. Maybe conservative tendencies are the same tendencies brought out by any partisan/ideological group.
And then they continued on to say that Stalin, Castro and Kruschev were actually conservatives because they fit into this framework of “conservative” thought. Meaning, any liberal who exhibits those symptoms is actually conservative. Or maybe it’s just Scotsmen. I don’t know.
So, lessee, you pretty much confirmed his assertions about conservatives, but boy oh boy, you sure caught him in some spelling errors! Way to go, Shodan!
Come on. The fact is, it was blather. You know it, I know it, the American people know it. The only person who doesn’t know it is Morfos. I’m sure he’ll fit right in here, alongside Reeder et al.
He compared conservatives to Nazis, for crying out loud. Does that really require a point by point refutation, where we compare and contrast modern conservative thought with national socialist thought, and demonstrate that there are few if any points of comparison?
Or can we just agree to dismiss anyone without a second thought who godwinizes conservatives in their second post to the SDMB? If he thinks I’m a Nazi, he’s not going to be convinced by reasoned argument that I’m not a Nazi. After all, Nazis would lie about the Nazism, right? If I say that as a conservative I don’t believe in killing jews, he’s going to think I’m lying, no?
You can’t have a rational conversation with someone who believes you are a Nazi. Instead, you just write them off as a ignorant bigot, who confirms your every suspicion about Liberals. If you Liberals are so concerned, why don’t YOU refute Morfos’s arguments? Or perhaps you share them? If you truly believe conservatives are akin to Nazis then debate is pointless, no? So why are you debating?
