What makes people vote Republican? Why in particular do working class and rural Americans usually vote for pro-business Republicans when their economic interests would seem better served by Democratic policies?
People vote Republican because Republicans offer “moral clarity”—a simple vision of good and evil that activates deep seated fears in much of the electorate. Democrats, in contrast, appeal to reason with their long-winded explorations of policy options for a complex world.
Most interesting comment within the post:
MICHAEL SHERMER
Publisher of Skeptic magazine, monthly columnist for Scientific American; Author, Why Darwin Matters; and How We BelieveThe Conscious of the Conservative
Two cheers for Jonathan Haidt’s essay. At long last a liberal academic social scientist has recognized (and had the courage to put into print) the inherent bias built into the study of political behavior—that because Democrats are so indisputably right and Republicans so unquestionably wrong, conservatism must be a mental disease, a flaw in the brain, a personality disorder that leads to cognitive malfunctioning. Thus, Haidt is mostly right when he asks us to move beyond such “diagnoses” and remember “the second rule of moral psychology is that morality is not just about how we treat each other (as most liberals think); it is also about binding groups together, supporting essential institutions, and living in a sanctified and noble way. When Republicans say that Democrats ‘just don’t get it,’ this is the ‘it’ to which they refer.”
#65
in just 6 years, a republican president with a republican house, a republican senate and a conservative supreme court took a balanced budget, ballooned the government, and drove the treasury so far into the red it’s hard to imagine, and repealed centuries old protections against your privacy, repealed your property rights, invaded your bedroom, etc.
and yet you and your ilk still think it’s the democrats who can’t balance a budget and want to tell you how to run your life.
that’s not maturity, that lobotomization
WAKE UP MAN
#27 Dallas,
Don’t forget reactionary thinking that is an attempt to go back to the good old dark ages. That’s where the republican party currently is.
I would welcome seeing the Democrats re-embrace the working class people of the country. I would welcome seeing the republicans re-attempt to stand for smaller government and libertarianism.
Then we might have two reasonably respectable parties from which to choose.
Unfortunately, at present, we have one party that is for larger government and some good programs and at least recognizes that the bills must be paid, but otherwise gives in to the corporations on way too many points, especially deregulation.
And we have another party that is even more into deregulation, is for enormous government, serious legal controls on people’s lives, and borrowing terabucks from China to fund it all in hopes that it will be the other guys who look bad when they have to pay the bills.
The former is the democraps. They suck. The latter is the repugnicans. They are truly vile and despicable and controlling and have no respect for the constitution that made this the once great nation that it was and must be stopped by almost any means necessary.
And yet, we the idiots still vote for no civil rights, the least fiscally conservative people in the world, and the ones who really want to take it all from us and give it to their billionaire friends.
#61 – JCA,
Excellent post. I just don’t think we’d really number in the hundreds of millions. Perhaps a few million at most instead of that festering
blog*blob of 6+ billion.*Actually, that was a typo when I made it the first time. I just liked it so much I thought I’d share. Perhaps it was a Freudian slip, you know … where you say one thing but mean your mother.
The articles seems to talk about liberals and conservatives more than Democrats and Republicans. I was under the impression that there were liberals and conservatives within each of the two major political parties so I am a tad bit confused by this original article. Some other questions to ask that might help would be:
“What makes people vote Democrat?”
“Is there a difference between each of the two U.S. political parties?”
“Is voting for the political party that will f*ck me in the @ss for the next four to eight years really worth it and did the Founding Fathers have this in mind back in the mid to late 1700s?”
If Dems are logical, where is the logic in equalization by decree? Where lies the logic that the output of my effort is another’s property without my sanction? Why does a claim of “need” trump ability? Why is it logical to assume that a person will continue to exert their specific talents, only to have the reward for that effort (money, in our society) taken away without their consent. That goes directly against human nature.
No love lost for Republicans on many other points mentioned, but the Dems are not bathed in gilded light either.
I’m happy to pay some basic taxes for the military/police, and a few general ‘controls” that protect and allow ALL people a chance to prosper.
Nothing will ever convince me that forced “equalization” of society should come at the expense of those who are truly talented. In the end, their efforts drive all of society forward
You have two choices: Kang or Kodos.
I don’t understand why people vote Republican if they want lower taxes… The only people who should vote Republican for lower taxes are the extremely rich. Voting McCain instead of Obama is voting for higher taxes, after all.
And, why is your tax dollars going to kill people in other countries better than your tax dollars going to help people in our own country? How much has George W. Bush cost us in lives and money? How great would it have been for all that money to have been funneled into bettering American life?
Some associate the Republican party with lower taxes and higher morals. The liberals don’t see that. We see taxes that are just as high going to help corporations and the rich instead of education or the people. We don’t see morals, we see a group who doesn’t want homosexuals, any religion other than Christian, or really just anyone who isn’t like them in this country.
It’s odd. I read the comments here, and I see people saying “And that’s why I vote Republican” and I can’t help but say to mysef… “But… that’s why I vote Democrat.”
#49, If the corps didn’t have a government that would bail them out then perhaps they would be a little more practical. I agree, this “privatize profit, share risk” bullshit has got to end. You want to see these corporations act respectable? Force them to solve their own problems and to stop running to Nanny State every time they screw up.
I find it amusing that Republicans are crowing about this study, when all it reveals is their sheep-like reverence of authority for its own sake.
If we had held onto the “virtues” of not challenging authority and never reforming institutions, we would never have had a Renaissance, never an Enlightenment and no progress whatsoever.
Republicans get rich off of the social and scientific progress that liberalism has created — and then complain about precisely the liberal Enlightenment progress that made that possible.
If Conservatives had been in charge in the 20th century, our society would never have reformed away from the nineteenth-century industrial revolution. We would still have children working 12 hours a day in factories because that’s what makes a profit — which, to a Republican, is the only “moral” factor to consider. Getting rid of child labor and imposing laws on smokestack emission is “liberal interference.”
If it weren’t for liberals, in fact, no institutions would be challenged, no authority would be challenged, and we’d still all be under the thumb of the Catholic Church, believing that the sun rotates around the earth. This is exactly what the study shows. It’s truly amusing that Republicans are proud of it…
Here’s an answer from someone who was probably more intelligent than any who visit this thread. Maybe some insight can be gleaned from it…
“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
You’ll learn more than you ever care to about human behavior by reading Joseph Campbell. It’s all M.Y.T.H!!
@Paddy-O (#76)
If only today’s Republicans were conservative I would still be one. What they are now is the evil reflection of the Democrats.
I don’t know, some bizarre ideology that says that the constitution shold guide us as to the proper perimeters of the federal government.
interesting, some great comments posted here…
kind of amusing how the comments posted here actually
illustrate the article’s (which overall, is pretty good)
observations and “conclusions” for lack of a better
word/phrase quite well.
most all the people here who appear to vote
republican or show conservative values mostly
posted clear, insightful, no-nonsense thoughts
on the topic, as well as offering “real world”
observations and solutions.
those who vote democratic or show liberal
values(yes, an oxymoron, -i know)
posted mostly sarcastic remarks or comments with
little insight or evidence of actual self-thought.
-nor did they offer any “real world” observations
or solutions in rebuttals or otherwise.
-brilliant.
if the repubs could get back to their original roots and ideology
and stop being such hell bent religious fanatics,
(as of late, especially) they still would be the party (in the
current 2 party system) that would best lead America back to the
founding fathers intentions, as well as the great nation it
once was.
in a “perfect world” -as several have requested, imo, the closest
thing we have available to us that *might* best represent and
guide us back to the America we once knew and loved, is a
libertarian vote.
-however, as those of us who do note own, nor see the world
through rose tinted glasses know, -it no longer (quite
possibly, never did, if you want to be pessimistic about it.)
matters who you vote for. the banks and a few power elite
control and guide what both parties do to serve their own
designs and agenda
what that agenda is, -is a multi-faceted debate for
another day.
I wish i could offer a solution, but realistically speaking,
without knowing *who* all the *real* players in this grand,
global game of chess are, i cannot.
-s
ps…fwiw: i am and have always been agnostic
Uhh…how about: People who have talent, work their butts off, and take risks shouldn’t be penalized because others don’t.
lol @ #76
Paddy-O, my dad use to say something similar
“your born a liberal and die a conservative”
-words to take heed to. 😀
-s
@ #76:
Interesting Churchill quote (I confess I Googled it) but I think the point may be a little beyond it.
I don’t have a problem (although I don’t always agree) with conservative values: family values – check, small government – check, free enterprise – check, etc.
However, I do think the current “conservative” movement in the US has been hijacked by what I call Regressives (I think “reactionaries” doesn’t do them justice). I mean people that will vote based on issues like abortion, gay marriage and abstinence-only above the constitution, checks and balances, the economy, etc.
I don’t understand how one could say they are for small government and yet want the government to have more control over people’s lives. Let’s be honest here, this is only due to religion.
Back to the FA, I can understand the yearning for social order, but not the obsession with other people’s lives.
I don’t want to picture what two guys choose to do in their bedroom, let them do whatever and don’t even ask me to think about it — it’s not hurting anyone. I wouldn’t personally ask someone to perform an abortion but I won’t presume to run their lives. Finally, I think abstinence-only education is a complete joke: it’s like giving a gun and an endless supply of bullets to kids, not teaching them gun safety and telling them to always carry but never use it.
More than anything, I’ll fight against anyone that wants to impose their morals on me, even if I happen to agree with them on some issues. I’d rather preserve a constitution that stops that kind of action, so that when someone I really don’t agree with is in power, they can’t impose their morals through the government. I’ll also fight for someone’s right to express their opinion even if I don’t agree with them. That’s what America is about.
Unfortunately, it seems Regressive groups are making a power grab and the current incarnation of the Republican party is playing along. I hope people act as Americans and not Republicans, and see things for what they are.
For example, look at the McCain of today. The self-title Maverick of 2000 is gone. That McCain is lost. The guy who’s there now has completely sold out (lobbyists run his campaign, his pandering regressive VP pick, voted with Bush 90% of the time), while insisting he stands for independence or change. BTW, how can he claim to embrace Obama’s “Washington is Broken, we need change” motto? If you, reading this, have supported Bush & the Republican Congress the last few years and support McCain now, isn’t that like saying you are stupid and you were duped all this time? Or is he just plain lying? What is worse?
*83
haha..couldn’t agree more..graduated from college the world’s biggest bleeding-heart liberal. After working hard, saving and raising a family I started to altruistically work in situations where I witnessed firsthand the unintended consequences of liberalism…the idealistic dreams of The Great Society, where people whose ancestors were tough and hardworking were too dependent on the government check to even conceive of doing anything for themselves. And of course, the welfare moms living in the ‘model cities’ [slum housing projects] realizing that fathers were unnecessary anymore, other than as sperm donors, with resultant replacement of fathers with criminal gang hierarchies and approval. The sad thing is that the utterly dependent are also the least appreciative of anything this country has to offer. And thus it spirals down. I wonder what great unintended consequences will arise from Obama’s pipedreams of ‘hope and change’? Maybe we can all live in a ‘model society’ someday!!!
#84
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, although I’m a conservative, I feel that the use of your terms – regressives hijacking the Republican party -is true to an unfortunate extent. As a conservative I want a smaller, less imperial federal government and I want the religious zealots to fade into the sunset. I wish they’d form their own party. They’ve completely besmirched conservatism in my opinion.
Looks like Republicans need a brief reality check about who actually does the work and earning in our society. It ain’t conservatives.
It is a simple and irrefutable fact that “blue states” produce the vast majority of the wealth in this country — wealth that the “red states” leech off of with their farm subsidies, religious subsidies and corporate welfare.
You really need to disabuse yourself of this myth that Republicans “work hard” whereas Democrats don’t. It’s quite the opposite.
Don’t the results of that morality study clearly show that conservatives are *less* moral than liberals?
Broadly speaking, the study shows that liberals value justice for its own sake, whereas conservatives value authority for its own sake.
One can cite countless cases where it is *immoral* to respect authority for its own sake. In fact, the most evil regimes in the world (Nazis, USSR, etc) are essentially the same totalitarianism whose central moral tenant is “respect for authority” above all else.
If you live in such a regime, it is clearly immoral to put your “loyalty to country” and “respect for authority” above the injustices committed by those regimes.
Yet, conversely, there is no scenario where valuing justice for its own sake is immoral. It is *always* moral to elevate justice over every other consideration — including blind loyalty to your country.
The study shows that conservatives have a strong sense of order; but that has nothing to do with having a moral sense.
Sorry, folks, but authoritarianism and nationalism have nothing to do with morality; these things, in fact, *weaken* morality.
#84 “Finally, I think abstinence-only education is a complete joke: it’s like giving a gun and an endless supply of bullets to kids, not teaching them gun safety and telling them to always carry but never use it.”
Hmm. I went to high school with ~1,500 kids. There was NO sex ed. And guess what? There wasn’t any kids running around pregnant. Hmm. Maybe the PARENTS took care of their kids and not the nanny state. And before people start screeching, the grape vine worked so well, you knew if someone had sex with someone else within days…
Hmm…
Those of you who were once liberal and became conservative have simply become self-absorbed and self-serving. That would be sad enough; but trying to hide your self-absorption by calling it “wisdom” is just embarrassing.
You linked to a session. The account of kweguard-etc@yahoo.com is logged in on that site.
WHAT MAKES PEOPLE VOTE REPUBLICAN?
They would like a little more foreplay before they get screwed.
WHAT MAKES PEOPLE VOTE REPUBLICAN?
Well, being an asshole helps.
What did you think the consequences of anal sex were? Now you know. Sort of makes you cringe at the thought of GHW Bush and Barbra in bed… but it IS the only logical explanation for “W”!
A simple explanation:
1) REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVISM – A black & white view of the world. Very appealing, no troubling gray areas of morality to deal with. Answers are easy, no need to question them. Intellectualism is shunned as elitism, so it appeals to those who think they are talked down to by smart people (global warming scientists, darwinists, astronomers, etc…)
3) DEMOCRATIC LIBERALISM – An all gray area view of the world. Not appealing to those who are unwilling to view the world as a very complex system. Offers few answers but offers lots of problems to solve. There is no one solution to a problem, everything is difficult. Morality is murky, benchmarks are few. Appeals to the more intellectual as a mental challenge.
#94 – Rick Cain,
1) Darwinists? What is a Darwinist? Do you mean someone who believes in overwhelming evidence? Or, do you mean someone who worships Darwin as a deity or prophet? I have a fairly good understanding of evolution and respect Darwin a lot. But, I don’t consider myself a Darwinist.
3) What happened to 2?
EVOLUTION: The Human geneome contains a mix of genes for instinct from early “focus on the family” societies and later “it takes a village” societies. http://www.politicalspecies.com
this creates distinctly different neurology:
http://www.neuropolitics.org
Social conditioning the software programming that goes into our physical hardware) shapes the rest.