Why Do Conservatives Opt For Formulaic Approaches?

[Cary]

I think this may be the main difference between us and them. They opt for things like: government is bad, always and everywhere--shrink government and all problems are solved.

Or: invade Iraq and make it a democracy--then all governments in the ME will become democracies and we will live happily ever after.

Is this not the height of hubris? Consider the human condition. Is there anything about the human condition that lends itself to suggest that our problems go away by merely applying some ideological formula? Is there anything in history to suggest this is true?

And even if there was anything to so suggest this, is there anything to suggest that we're capable of "discovering" such a formula?

Of course applying a forumla, and turning a blind eye to the issues, is far easier than sifting and weighing. I think that's the answer to my question right there.

[liberal N proud]

1. It is easier than thinking for themselves.

[unpossibles]

2. well, it seems to fit with the mode of thinking

that everything is an either/or, black/white issue with no subtelty or nuance. Like when my dad calls me a socialist or commmie pinko because I am for socialized medicine or when someone thinks everyone who is pro-choice is pro-abortion. or the whole for the troops but against the administration.

I have yet to figure it out though.

[HereSince1628]

13. Agree about black and white thinking

Its strongly associated with conservatives, regardless of whether they are republican, democratic.


You should read Jost et al. "Political conservatism as motivated social cognition" ( Psychological Bulletin vol 129, pp 339-375). That paper explores social-psychological correlates to conservative behavior.

That group of psychologists and sociologists evaluated 88 published studies (some of these are European so the paper is not only about conservatism in the US) to determine if correlations between political conservatism and expectations derived from the theories...they found the following significant correlations:

death anxiety ( r =50) This is why terror works so well with conservatives it also explains the nature of the appeal to conservatives of religions with afterlife beliefs.

system stability (.47) This is classic conservatism as manifested in part by the Buchannites. It also seems true of the moral majority, and it is distinctly true of the neocon-generated National Security Strategy adopted by Bush which declares the US will not tolerate even challenges to what they perceive to be US military and economic hegemony.

dogmatism/intolerance to ambiguity (.34) This in part explains conservative's propensity toward Black and white thinking.

openness to experience (-.32) This helps them to avoid clouding their ideology and their black and white reality with the hues of reality

uncertainty tolerance (-.27) Another character associated with black and white thinking. They can't stand it when something is ambiguous which is also associated with the next trait...

needs for order/structure/closure (.26) This explains in large part the appeal of the haste to hoist the "Mission Accomplished" banner.

integrative complexity (-.20) Conservative's inability to reconcile complex and sometimes contradictory ideas that often require thinking in shades of gray reinforces reliance on black and white thinking as well as gross simplification...something conservatives euphemistically call plain-talk.

fear of threat and/or loss (.18) Again explaining the way in which creating nightmare scenarios becomes a powerful means of manipulating conservatives

[Beer Snob-50]

3. I think this is the smartest thing that the rw has done.

take a complex problem and give to people in a simple way. I don't think our answers to the problems of the world would lend themselves to this approach.

[hatrack]

7. That's about it - fear of complexity

Because if you admit complexity, then you are tacitly admitting that the Good/Evil Black/White Us/Them map of the world you draw for your followers isn't enough.

Once you admit complexity, you admit that you might not have all the answers, and everything just unwinds from there.

[Canuckistanian]

8. That's a good explanation

It would explain the Rush-Hannity world-view. They tend to mock anything that is "nuanced" as if it's a 'librul plot' meant to confuse everybody.

[hatrack]

9. Add to that a whole bunch of people with serious Daddy Problems

And I think you've got the handy short version of why this country is so screwed up.

[kodi]

11. perhaps, but more likely fear of the unknown

see F A Hayek's

"Why I am not a conservative"

http://www.geocities.com/ecocorner/intelarea/fah1.html

"This brings me to the first point on which the conservative and the liberal dispositions differ radically. As has often been acknowledged by conservative writers, one of the fundamental traits of the conservative attitude is a fear of change, a timid distrust of the new as such,<5> while the liberal position is based on courage and confidence, on a preparedness to let change run its course even if we cannot predict where it will lead. There would not be much to object to if the conservatives merely disliked too rapid change in institutions and public policy; here the case for caution and slow process is indeed strong. But the conservatives are inclined to use the powers of government to prevent change or to limit its rate to whatever appeals to the more timid mind. In looking forward, they lack the faith in the spontaneous forces of adjustment which makes the liberal accept changes without apprehension, even though he does not know how the necessary adaptations will be brought about. It is, indeed, part of the liberal attitude to assume that, especially in the economic field, the self-regulating forces of the market will somehow bring about the required adjustments to new conditions, although no one can foretell how they will do this in a particular instance. There is perhaps no single factor contributing so much to people's frequent reluctance to let the market work as their inability to conceive how some necessary balance, between demand and supply, between exports and imports, or the like, will be brought about without deliberate control. The conservative feels safe and content only if he is assured that some higher wisdom watches and supervises change, only if he knows that some authority is charged with keeping the change "orderly.""

[tk2kewl]

4. It is the strong father model

it appeals to people who want to feel safe. it reminds them of Daddy telling them "BECAUSE I SAID SO!" when they asked "why, Daddy?"

the pukes use it to take advantage of the weak and afraid

[ThoughtCriminal]

5. Depends on what an "ideological formula" is

>>Is there anything about the human condition that lends itself to suggest that our problems go away by merely applying some ideological formula?

Is scientific method an "ideological formula"? Not that neo-conservatives would ever consider using something like that - might get the "Wrong" answer.

[Cary]

12. The scientific method is not a formula. It is a strategy.

Pose a theory. The theory is attacked. If it fails, pose a new theory.

How does this amount to an ideology?

[ThoughtCriminal]

15. True

Done properly, it is the opposite of "formula".

[Gnaeus]

6. Americans

have become lazy. Why think when the RW will do it for you? Why send you children to war when some poor kid will do it for you? Why help solve the Israel/Palestine problem when they kill each other off eventually? Why help the poor when they will die from starvation or hypothermia sooner or later?

[Cary]

10. Why think when you can be a "ditto-head"?

Rush does all the heavy lifting for them. Right?

[sendero]

14. Same as Communists and Libertarians..

.... it is easier to let a blanket concept drive your every decision than to actually think and consider each one.

[StClone]

16. It is part of a cover for behind the scenes activities

They give a straight forward easy to push idea as a front often with a slogan -- "WMDs!" Behind the scenes it's a whole other story of gaining power and wealth for them and their cronies. If the original cover story deteriorates move to a simple ideological second cover story and push on -- "Liberation and Democracy!"

Iraq invasion was part of the War on Terror. Get Saddam and WMD's and we'll be safer. Behind the scenes: Build bases that were lost in Saudi Arabia, capture world's 2nd largest oil resources, privatize Iraqi and deliever war profiteering for cronies.

SS needs to be "privatized to save it." Behind scenes: Destroy Government Social programs and send Billions to K-Street cronies.

"Tax cuts will stimulate the Economy" Behind the scenes the wealthy get the motherload of tax cut from which they donate to the Republicans. The middle class sees no real tax reduction as other taxes are needed to raise revenue for schools, roads and infrastructure. They strap the future middle class with a mounting debt.

[sendero]

17. Actually...

... I like your answer more than my own. You've hit the nail on the head.

These folks play stupid, but they aren't. They've found that playing stupid gets more votes.

[Cary]

18. That is so obvious.

Of course. Why didn't I think of it?

[Debs]

19. The most destructive

Thing Raygun did to this country, and the list is long and agonizing, is to convince people that complex problems have simple answers. This is self evident nonsense, if the answers were simple the problem would no longer exist. I think many people have an intellectual insecurity problem and therefore fear complexity. Others realize that they are busy and dont put the required work into understanding complex issues. Its easy for me, I have an easy life and politics is my hobby. I dont hunt or fish, this is what I do, I read political books all the time and think about the issues. I dont blame people for not being the political junkie I am nor for not putting the time and resources into understanding all this I do. On the other hand to abdicate totally the responsibility to understand not just the complexity but that there IS complexity is to me beyond understanding. To ridicule the very idea that things are complicated and require a nuanced approach or at the very least an attempt to understand the nuance is irresponsible. It is no revelation to the people on this board that the Rush/Hannity brigade is irresponsible. No question it is working for them though

[txaslftist]

20. "Shrink Government" is 1984 double speak.

Anyone who seriously looks at republican history can see that neither Reagan, Bush I or Bush II takes the idea of shrinking government seriously. The only president in recent memory that even took a stab at it was Clinton.