This study shows that conservative's favor the rich and look down upon the working class. It shows the link between communism, nazism, and conservatives. They concluded conservatives are out of date, and want to maintain the status quo.
Is this why nutcase neo-cons are expected to lose 4-1 this election? They didn't think liberals would win last election. Could conservatism be a form of mental illness?
Here is the reaserch papers. http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml
2006-08-18 18:45:12 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
You don't need a University study for what's apparent.
2006-08-18 18:50:34 · answer #1 · answered by I Q 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Are you sure you understood the article completely, or are you just taking things out of context?
The conclusion is conservatives support the status quo, but for a need for certainty. While that need for certainty and conclusion can get people in trouble, ambiguity helps far less.
As far as idiots:
"Although they concluded that conservatives are less "integratively complex" than others are, Glaser said, "it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded."
Conservatives don't feel the need to jump through complex, intellectual hoops in order to understand or justify some of their positions, he said. "They are more comfortable seeing and stating things in black and white in ways that would make liberals squirm," Glaser said." - from the article
Perhaps that is because conservatives see things as a moral question, not as a political methodology, a Machiavellian means to political positioning.
As far as the tolerance for inequality, economically or socially? Social inequality is wrong of course. But economic inequality is an unfortunate fact that can only be avoided by socialism and that is not a path most people want to go down. Socialism only lowers the standards for the majority and raises the standards for a small few. In fact the inequality is a motivating factor in a capitalist economy. That doesn't mean lower income people should be looked down upon socially. But of course, a liberal defines justice in terms of economic equality. The simple truth is a free market and certain jobs hold different values in a society, sometimes right and sometimes wrong, but that a social problem where is no real solution, unless you go with socialism, and well we covered that.
But the really interesting thing is you don’t even cite the actual research, but an article in UC Berkeley News, that is a bit biased. It is like playing telephone. Research to biased news to a posting that is a distortion, not even a question. Interesting ain’t it. Can you see the forest for the trees?
2006-08-18 19:54:50 · answer #2 · answered by robling_dwrdesign 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First - Liberals didn't win the last election
Second - Communism and the Nazi's hated each other. Politically there is no similarity between them. Fascism and Communism are totally opposing thoughts politically and philosophically.Conservatives want less government involvement period, so they is definitely no link there that could be seen by any rational human,of which Berkley is in extremely short supply
Third - The conservative party has more middle class, rural members than Democrats do. Look at the last election map of the US. Republicans carried almost every rural county in the US. Democrats tend to live in Urban areas and are generally extremely poor, or extremely rich. As a matter of fact look at the assets of the congressmen, Mr I love the poor, and see which party has more rich members?
Last - The same polls had Kerry winning the last election till midnight election night. Wrong again
2006-08-18 19:11:04 · answer #3 · answered by mark g 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Throughout history, whether it's been a democracy, monarchy, totalitarian regime, or a Machiavellian Republic, conservatives have always been wealthy, those in power, those interested in keeping power by controlling the masses. People who are in the Republican party and don't believe that Big Brother's hand is in everything are morons. The religious right is a lot more active than their left-wing counterparts, though. Whose fault is that? But the modern Democrats aren't the answer either. They stand for nothing and fall for everything. They pander to special interest groups as well. So conservatives at least have had more unity in the past. Now that Bush's approval rating is so low, this may be the time for change. I can only hope. Oh, wait, wait I can also vote. If more hippes went out and voted the last time, we wouldn't of had another four years of the evil axis (cheney, bush, rumsfeld, listed in order of evilness)
2006-08-18 19:01:23 · answer #4 · answered by doc_jhholliday 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All I had to do was to see the name "Berkely" in the link to give me a good idea of the type of people who did this so-called research. First of all, assuming your a liberal, you gave in to the typical route of libs by spewing slander over substance. Your bunch claims to be the "tolerant" ones, yet you feel free to make blanket statements in the form of derrogatory name-calling and lies. Further, and this is not meant to be mean-spirited, just a fact, you all don't seem to be able to think for yourselves. If the drive-by media broadcasts an overtly biased report that includes a snippet of out-of-context truth about a conservative politician, the democrats flock together like buzzards on a dying cow to embellish the news and castigate the person involved.
You can't stand it because conservatives are largely for moral absolutes, and that means accountability for wrong, of which liberals want no part. The "if it feels good, do it" mentality is threatened and so therefore you go on the offense and start slandering all conservatism and those who engage in it.
2006-08-18 19:02:15 · answer #5 · answered by Regina D 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Heh...note it's from Berkeley, on the LEFT Coast.
BTW are you talking conservative or NEO-con? I'm the former. And I sure don't look down on the working class. I'm also a Constitutionalist.
I also find this amusing in light of the fact that Bush is a closet liberal.
2006-08-18 18:55:20 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gee its from Berkeley , think it might just be biased
Glaser acknowledged that the team's exclusive assessment of the psychological motivations of political conservatism might be viewed as a partisan exercise
2006-08-18 19:23:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Note that Berkeley is one of the most left wing Universities in the country. Was Michael Moore involved in that survey?
2006-08-18 18:55:06 · answer #8 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Shocking, just shocking, isn't it???
A university in the People's Republic of Berkeley is down on conservatives and this is NEWS, right?
Use your brain!
2006-08-18 19:09:30 · answer #9 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Make up your mind, dummy. Are you talking about conservatives in general or neocons in particular? I thought you were one of the libbies who always obsessed about distinguishing between neocons and traditional conservatives. And why are you thanking them, whichever ones you are talking about?
2006-08-18 19:04:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nothing beats a question poster who can't see how skewed his own sources are.
Thanks for the laugh today guy, I pity that you live in ignorance.
No wonder you guys can't win any elections.
2006-08-20 04:58:43 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋