I like to be able to document factual assertions. I cannot this time, so I am just tossing this out for discussion.
My observation is that rich liberals are usually those who inherit their wealth, and who take wealth for granted, or they acquire their wealth without a lot of struggle. They have a lucrative talent, they have the opportunity to develop that talent, and they do so in ways that are intrinsically enjoyable. I am thinking mainly I suppose of those in the entertainment industry, or who are well rewarded artists, best selling authors, and so on. Also, if one has a talent for mathematics, high tech work is emotionally rewarding. I have read that Bill Gates is, and Steve Jobs was, a Democrat. I doubt that either of them ever dreaded going to work in the morning, even before they became rich.
Rich conservatives - and I would include reactionaries who want to restore laissez faire capitalism - seem to be those who had to struggle against the odds to get where they are. Perhaps they were born poor, left home at the age of sixteen, took a minimum wage job, and somehow managed to start a company. Or perhaps they worked their way through college with little or no help from their parents.
In the first volume of Mein Kampf Chapter II, “Years of Study and Suffering,” this is what Adolf Hitler had to say about people like that, “this relentless struggle kills all pity. One’s own painful scramble for existence suffocates the feeling of sympathy for the misery of those left behind.”
That is not what I consider to be a reasoned response. Also, Adolf Hitler had a great deal of insight into human nature. He had to in order to achieve what he did. Sure, the guy was evil, but he did not come close to conquering the mainland of Europe by being wrong about everything.
Against the Bush and Romney dynasty we need to consider the Roosevelt’s and the Kennedy’s. Blacks dominate basketball and boxing. I doubt many of them vote Republican.
I imagine among the very rich, both liberals and conservatives are overwhelmingly those who never had to scrabble up from actual poverty. One doesn’t make it from grinding poverty to enormous wealth in one lifetime without absurdly awesome windfalls.
…and the occurrence of any great and sudden windfall doesn’t change one’s attitudes about society that much.
Since there are plenty of counter examples, I’d say that your theory is completely off the wall. I can think of counter examples off the top of my head, which isn’t a good sign of a solid theory.
And my observation has been that rich people are PEOPLE, and that their political orientation varies about as greatly as any other group, so attempting to paint them with a broad brush is about as effectively as trying to say all ‘black’ people do A or all ‘hispanics’ do B and all ‘white’ people do C. It’s ridiculous.
So, do they have some ‘lucrative talent’ or did they inherit their wealth? True, they could do both, but it seems two different distinct traits there. Regardless, there are examples of folks with a ‘lucrative talent’ being conservative or liberal, moderate or whack-a-do extreme of one kind or another. It varies greatly. Again, I can think of several examples off the top of my head of folks who hold all of those views while being rich due to having a ‘lucrative talent’, as I can think of folks who inherited their wealth as holding all of those different view points as well.
What does a dread or the converse of getting up in the morning have to do with or without being a Democrat??
Regardless, while I don’t know about Jobs, Gates certainly had a more ‘liberal’ orientation. That didn’t stop him from working hard or getting rich, however.
Well, except for all the ‘Rich conservatives’ who inherited their wealth, of course…or the ones who gained their wealth through having a ‘lucrative talent’. And all the liberals who worked their asses off and struggled against the odds to get where they are, obviously. And all the rich liberals who were born poor, left home at 16, took a minimum wage job, blah blah blah, etc etc etc.
Hitler was a complete whack job with a totally skewed perspective.
:rolleyes: He didn’t have any deep insights into human nature. What a crock of shit. He TALKED good, and was able to sway people to HIS viewpoint because his particular skewed and fucked up view point happened to coincide with a lot of pent up hostility and evil rage at the same target he had. Seriously…wtf?
You’re hanging your hat on a loose peg. “Hitler thought it was a good idea” isn’t exactly a convincing argument in general, and doesn’t help when your claims are based on simplistic concepts of motivation and the acquisition of wealth. The terms liberal and conservative as you use them are clearly biased to represent a point of view. You could just as easily say that people who worked hard for their money would be appreciate how difficult it is to acquire and be altruistic as a result, while those born wealthy have no shared experiences with those who have to make it on their own and thus no sympathy for them. So there’s only flawed reasoning in your OP.
And if the part Jewish one-balled German paperhanger hadn’t been wrong about so many things he might have conquered the mainland of Europe, so pointing out his failure doesn’t help your argument either.
I will say this about the OP’s theory – conservatives certainly think they had it rough.
I’m not rich by any stretch of the word, but I live comfortably, and I really haven’t had to put forth much effort to do so. I grew up in a decent middle-class neighborhood, went to a great public school, and had fantastic parents who devoted time to raising me right. I was able to get a decent start in college on my savings and I’ve been supporting myself since I was around 20. I owe all of that to the head start I got by having a decent childhood.
Meanwhile, some friends of mine grew up in the same neighborhoods, had similar parents, went to the same public schools, went to college and landed decent jobs making decent money. Basically, my life story, except somewhere along the line they started railing against any and all taxes, bitching about welfare moms, and going on and on about how hard they work for their money.
They’ve created this illusion that they’re self-made, totally disregarding how different their lives would be if they had been born in, say, Compton, or Mexico City. Or even North Platte, Nebraska.
It’s true that, for me at least, a lot of the times I find myself leaning left is because I realize that I was given quite a bit in my childhood, and I understand that not everyone had that luxury. My friends who lean right view their childhoods much differently. The only actual difference is perception.
I’ll cheerfully agree that there are many rich people who conform to the OP’s described stereotypes. I hope he will agree that there are just as many who do not.
Obama came from nothing, worked his way up to be president of the United States and moderately wealthy as well (not hugely wealthy as it goes these days but a net worth of $10.5 million is not too shabby either).
He’s liberal (or socialist to hear the republicans tell it).
He also would belie the quote from Mein Kampf that this kills all sympathy in a person.
I’ve noticed it depends more on what enterprise people get rich in. People who get rich in energy (oil, coal, etc) tend to be conservative while those who get rich in IT tend to be more liberal. Not a perfect correlation though.
Not only that but what motivates them? I wouldn’t be surprised if those in energy donated to the GOP because it helped their business interests while those who are in IT donate because of how the dems legislate on social issues, foreign policy and our national infrastructure.
I believe the Democracy Alliance (which consists of wealthy liberal donors) was started by 4 entrepreneurs who donated mostly for social issues. Two or three were gay and I believe all but 1 (or 2) got wealthy in IT.
Wait, you think that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs didn’t have to struggle? Why aren’t you a multi-billionaire, then? Why didn’t you just choose to take the easy route like Gates and Jobs did?
By applying his retarded racial and anti-intellectual ideas, a lot of people that would had helped him ended up dead, imprisoned, or working for the Allies, like many nuclear physicists…
Then Hitler went to an economic war footing too late, got into dumb R&D projects, and squandered many that would had made a difference if they had gotten support early.
Then he decided to fight a two front war, and then declare war to the US, just because he got a treaty with Japan.
