There might possible be differences in the makeup of liberals and conservatives. There are a lot of articles that say things like this:
As of now, I’m very skeptical that liberalism or conservatism is based on some kind of physiology, and I’m even very skeptical that we can define liberalism or conservatism in a way that makes sense over time—society changes a lot over short periods of time, even.
What I’m pretty sure of is that the modern American right can’t really call itself conservative. It’s a radical movement. And there’s nothing traditional about modern fundamentalist Christianity.
Almost every political movement has people who support it for good or bad reasons/motives, and out of mature or immature reasoning.
There are some liberals who support liberalism because they see a need for universal health care, a cleaner environment, less gun violence, higher taxation of the wealthy, and so forth - all logical, thought-out ideas. Then there are some liberals, especially some college students, who support liberalism with utter immaturity, braying, unreasonable, whiny tantrum logic.
There are some conservatives who support conservatism because they want a reduced national debt, limited government, a prudent fiscal approach, freedom of speech, energy independence, a strong national defense, and so forth. Some are PhDs, some are military generals, surgeons, etc. Then there are some conservatives who support the right wing for racist, sexist, or equally hardheaded, immature tantrum logic as Evergreen-State-ers.
We’ve heard that before: “You call yourselves tolerant, but you won’t tolerate my hatred, bigotry, bias, and religious chauvinism.”
That’s right, sweetie: we are tolerant of diversity…so long as it isn’t hate-filled, harmful, and damaging. The other kind we call out and work to defeat.
I’ve always seen it as a “top down” vs “bottom up” approach to taking care of the country. Conservatives see the function of govt as making sure the machinery of society is able to function properly. Specifically, if the marketplace is running at its best then the individuals will get a chance to participate in whatever level they choose. Liberals believe that its the individuals who make the machinery of society run and it’s govt’s role to make sure those individuals have everything they need to properly participate in the marketplace.
Now, of course, this is a gross oversimplification of the attitude of both mindsets; in reality both recognize that it takes a mixture of both approaches to make society run smoothly. But neither point of view stems from an inherent immaturity or maturity.
It is hard to answer that question without engaging in confirmation bias.
Having said that, in my experience liberals are more aware of the fact that life is unfair and unpredictable while conservatives tend to hold onto a view that the world is more fair, more predictable and recognizes their (self diagnosed) high level of worth as individuals which they think will keep them safe in a hostile world. Also I get the impression conservatives are looking for ways to pass off base human motivations (greed, revenge, bigotry) as somehow good for civilization as a whole while in general, liberals are more aware of the fact that we have to make sacrifices to make society work. Also spending some time talking to liberals vs conservatives, it is mostly the conservatives who live in a bubble of propaganda. Liberals are biased, but we do not write off all news sources that aren’t MSNBC and daily Kos as ‘fake news’.
Liberals do prefer a strong role for the government, but this comes from many factors. Many liberals do not use welfare, but we support it because we know life isn’t fair.
Confirmation bias? Yeah, but in my experience conservatives are the ones who haven’t matured. Many are angry, scared white people who are afraid of the outside world and who retreat into a bubble of propaganda to escape how confusing and overwhelming the world is. There are a lot of people who need government assistance, but you can’t really delineate them by political views. Everyone goes on medicare and social security when they hit their 60s, and the elderly are more to the right.
There are hypocrites all over (the Evergreen shit is horrifying, BTW. I’ve been listening to the interview with Bret Weinstein, who, seriously, if he started his own podcast, I would listen to it. What a fascinating man.) There is nastiness all over. It’s not the primary domain of any political camp, or religion, or race, it’s just people fucking suck sometimes.
I wish people would at least be willing to come forward from that angle. It’s really hard to have a good-faith discussion otherwise.
And has been said, Trump is not a dem or rep. He used to be friends with the Clintons. I don’t care about his politics as he doesn’t have any.
He’s just a bloviating asshole of the first degree. I would love to say that to his face. Class does not come out of a gold colored spray paint. Love does not come from buying hookers. Trump does not understand this.
I’ll be honest. My hatred for him is so intense, I often fantasize about spitting in his face. Part of it is that I know people like him, personally. They are rich, narcissistic, misogynist and vacuous, and I get the same slimy feeling when I’m around them. You just sort of feel bad knowing that there are people in the world like that, and then knowing that he is admired by so many is even more depressing.
That said, my feelings have nothing to do with his politics. I agree that he has no political orientation. In fact, my view of him as a vile human being is separate from my view of him as unfit to govern the country. His moral bankruptcy is a separate issue from his incompetence.
I’d like to think I’m the sort of person who puts my money where my mouth is. I won’t cast a vote for someone who behaves badly. I withdrew my support from Bernie when he denied the violence of a small minority of his followers at the DNC. To me, that response, well it lacked maturity.
You conveniently left out the Authoritarian Progressives: entitled college students who demand safe spaces in lieu of open discourse, see any disagreement as only resulting from bigotry or racism, and who find offense in anything and everything.
These, of course, would be the immature little cucks who spawned the reactionaries to which you refer. Why you left them out is, I can only presume to be, an affirmation of the high maturity of their viewpoint?
We can become more liberal and more conservative simultaneously (less likely to support reckless and radical policy changes). The right wing today isn’t conservative; it’s reactionary.
My post was not an exhaustive list, just what was on my mind. You can describe your political enemies better than I can for you. I have little interaction with authoritarian progressive, so I couldn’t speak to their faults, or judge if they’re weak willed men letting minorities have sex with their women.
Yeah, I realize that moderate/centrist are actual political positions, and I don’t want to claim that they are somehow more correct than liberal/conservative positions.
What I’m saying is that it’s much easier to believe when you are young that there’s one absolute political truth, and as you get older, you hopefully realize that the world is complicated and there are many unknowns. Perhaps it’s a sort of agnosticism? Like, I am still pretty liberal, but I’m much more aware of the fact that I might be wrong about how my ideas would actually work as policies among real humans.
It’s also worth noting that, during the lifetimes of almost everyone alive today, there’s been a great shift toward the left, both economically and socially. So, if someone who was born 50 years ago became gradually more liberal as he aged, he might still end up more conservative than average, since societal norms have shifted even faster than his personal beliefs.
Sure, American Liberalism derives from an immaturity where the Government has magical powers where they can just keep printing money to throw at problems or protect everyone from bullies and crooks by making the mean racists and investment banks just go away. Problems can generally be solved by sitting around public spaces banging bongos and posting selfies on social media.
Of course American Conservativism derives from an immaturity where America holds a magical special place in the world, as decreed by God himself. Problems can generally be solved by money, building walls, or if necessary, guns and the glorious righteous might of the US military.
It’s often hard to pick which “America” I hate more.
It’s the same reason people admire Patrick Bateman, Gordon Gekko and Jordan Belfort.
What I don’t understand is why he’s admired by so many working class people when he’s the antithesis of everything they are about. Except that he makes them feel empowered, I guess.