Explaining Conservative Support Among “Ordinary People”. Only 39.7% of voters, or 24% of the Canadian population supported the right wing Conservative Party in the last Canadian general election. The base for this party consists of religious extremists, but these make up only about 10% of the population. Then there are the five percent of the wealthy and near-wealthy who naturally vote Conservative, since their policies allow them to skim-off ever more of societies riches. Ideologically-rooted haters and greed creeps are the natural basis for far right parties. But how does one explain the support the remaining 9% of the population, neither cultists nor rich, give to the Conservatives? How to explain the support given by people who will be directly harmed by much right-wing legislation? In order to explain this seeming contradiction we have to examine four factors: education and culture alienation social psychology age, gender and ethnic factors Education and Culture Regardless of the formal level of education, this is a group that is not well educated nor has a particularly high level of culture. Our schools do not teach people to think critically and to argue rationally. Thus, the uneducated do not discuss and debate, but mutually reinforce their prejudices. Anyone who steps out of line is either shouted down or ignored. They do not recognize a rational argument and thus are easily bamboozled by the strings of fallacies spouted by right-wing politicians. This is made doubly easy since these politicians pander to their prejudices. Their culture consists of kitsch, corporate mass culture, or at best a philistine adoration of the “classics.” Anything beyond that is deemed “highbrow”. “modern”, or “intellectual” and thus not worthy of consideration. Attempts to raise the general cultural level or to introduce critical ideas are seen as a threat, and thus right-wing politicians who seek to cut back on government support for the arts get the backing of the culturally unsophisticated. Alienation Right-wing voters tend to be suburbanites. They do not live in communities, but are isolated in the suburbs, and even when connections are made, they tend to be with people similar to themselves. Isolated, with their only window of the world being the TV, they are subject to the fears and prejudices whipped up by the mass media. They don't encounter the people thus demonized, so only have the media stereotypes to go on. This situation, combined with prejudices they have inherited from their parents, leads to the creation of an unconscious “hate list”. We all know their list - tree huggers, anarchists, trade unionists, protesters, feminists, leftists, hippies, intellectuals etc. If a right-wing politician can tar his opponents as such or promise to harm the individuals on this list, he has the vote of the alienated suburbanite in his pocket. A certain amount of the right wing vote is simply a desire for revenge against other citizens deemed unworthy or a threat. cont'ed... http://porkupineblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/explaining-conservative-support-among.html
This is why they cheered the number of people Rick Perry put to death the other night... Most of these people will have been brought up in an authoritarian manner. They react to this in two ways: They identify with the dominators, desire a “strong leader” and hence are open to someone as anti-democratic as Harper. Their attitude toward people deemed “beneath them” (remember the hate list) is that of the bully. (The idea that “these people ought to be suppressed.”) One important result of an authoritarian upbringing is denial as a life-long procedure when faced with an unpleasant reality. Generally, their personal lives are ruled by denial, not just the political realm. Hence, when disasters result from right-wing policies, these are denied outright, or they latch on to a conspiracy theory to get them off the hook. It seems that denial is not only a function of a repressive upbringing, but is inherent in the way we think. Neuroscientists have come up with a “theory of motivated reasoning” which helps explain the persistence of irrational beliefs. Our reasoning process is overlaid with emotional content. These emotions are what arise first, in advance of the reasoning process, when someone is confronted with an idea or situation. Our emotions bias us in advance. This works for everyone, progressive or reactionary. Since right-wingers have such a long and bitter catalogue of biases, I suggest that “motivated reasoning” leading to denial plays a much greater part in their decision making process than with left-wingers. (1) Since the 1960's, old-fashioned authoritarianism has been augmented by narcissism. Old fashioned authoritarianism had the benefit of encouraging modesty and projecting an air of solidity and decency – even though those at the top were free to build their pretentious mansions and engage in their orgies. Today, modesty, solidity and decency fly out the door. Suburbanites simply must have their tacky McMansions and all the consumer goods that go with them. And they must have it all now, not ten years down the road like their parent's generation. People who are insecure about themselves, something which authoritarian parenting mass produces - tend to substitute things to make up for that lost sense of worth. They will buy houses and cars that are more expensive than they can afford in order to project to the outside world that they are “somebody”. All these obese houses and expensive toys mean a massive debt, which in turn creates a great deal of financial insecurity which right-wing demagogues freely prey upon. Those of us who oppose this narcissistic consumer lifestyle are seen as a threat. Building houses for the less-fortunate or encouraging public transit are seen as “lowering property values” and “raising taxes.” Once again, the demagogues can read off their hate list of “cyclists, urban elitists, environmentalists” etc. and the narcissists gobble it up like Pablum.
...... I like pizza... ...and 'black sheep'... those that can rebel against an influence they know is wrong.
Being an old white guy over 50, I found this part interesting. Age, Gender and Ethnic Factors. Polls taken during the election showed that youth aged 18-25 overwhelmingly rejected the Conservatives. Women too, though not to the same extent. Nor was there any of the much-touted “breakthrough” among “ethnic” groups. The real basis of Conservative support consists of white men over age 50, Micheal Moore's “Stupid White Men.” There is much sense to this rejection by youth, women and minorities. When these Stupid White Men are rotting in their graves, today's youth will be suffering the dire consequences of all the cut-backs and piratizations, not to mention climate change and peak oil. Women are generally raised to have empathy and are thus not so attracted to the sociopathic concept that only corporations matter and people don't. People of color would be fools to support the party that contains most of Canada's racists, even though they pretend not to be.
It's funny how there is no difference between Canada and U.S. conservatives. I guess stupid is stupid anywhere in North America.
OMG! Now there is a liberal argument if I have ever seen one. "Our schools do not teach people to think critically and to argue rationally."
A Another liberal arguing point? "Regardless of the formal level of education, this is a group that is not well educated nor has a particularly high level of culture."
I think the biased opinions of this Canadian blogger are off the mark....you should know better than to accept some blogger's opinion as fact (but I guess you do tend to make a habit out of it, don't you?).
Actually, based on the Right-wing cons here, this blogger is spot on. I have seen every behavior he has described in you and the other cons here. Why would I have any reason to diss his opinion? It seems to explain you guys perfectly. Did you even read it?
Yep, it does explain someone here spot on. Just look at all your posts I have used it to explain, and that is only from one paragraph. Starting another paragraph; "A certain amount of the right wing vote is simply a desire for revenge against other citizens deemed unworthy or a threat."
One important result of an authoritarian upbringing is denial as a life-long procedure when faced with an unpleasant reality. Generally, their personal lives are ruled by denial, not just the political realm. Hence, when disasters result from right-wing policies, these are denied outright, or they latch on to a conspiracy theory to get them off the hook.
I will explain the difference between a right wing conservative and a left wing liberal. If an independent brought his 15 year old daughter to a right wing conservative's home and left her all that might happen is that she might hear that her dress is too short. If that independent left that same daughter at a left wingers house, all that would happen is that the leftwinger would try to get her clothes off.
I like this one better. Fits you to a TEE! "Their attitude toward people deemed “beneath them” (remember the hate list) is that of the bully." or "It seems that denial is not only a function of a repressive upbringing, but is inherent in the way we think. Neuroscientists have come up with a “theory of motivated reasoning” which helps explain the persistence of irrational beliefs. "
Here you go - straight from your blog. The facts; And the conclusion? UHMM? Someone want to explain that to me, please?
