Rightist Political Psychology

[Agnapostate]

I've been scanning some of the literature on this topic. I ran into some interesting work. The most expansive source I've found is a meta-analysis entitled Political conservatism as motivated social cognition (http://psycnet.apa.org/?fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339):


Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism, dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r=.50); system instability (.47); dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (-.32); uncertainty tolerance (-.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (-.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (-.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

A corroboration is found in Are Needs to Manage Uncertainty and Threat Associated With Political Conservatism or Ideological Extremity? (http://psp.sagepub.com/content/33/7/989.abstract):


Three studies are conducted to assess the uncertainty— threat model of political conservatism, which posits that psychological needs to manage uncertainty and threat are associated with political orientation. Results from structural equation models provide consistent support for the hypothesis that uncertainty avoidance (e.g., need for order, intolerance of ambiguity, and lack of openness to experience) and threat management (e.g., death anxiety, system threat, and perceptions of a dangerous world) each contributes independently to conservatism (vs. liberalism). No support is obtained for alternative models, which predict that uncertainty and threat management are associated with ideological extremism or extreme forms of conservatism only. Study 3 also reveals that resistance to change fully mediates the association between uncertainty avoidance and conservatism, whereas opposition to equality partially mediates the association between threat and conservatism. Implications for understanding the epistemic and existential bases of political orientation are discussed.

Are these negative traits? I can see a rightist case for "closemindedness" being made with the platitude that if your mind is too open, your brain will fall out. What anti-rightists might be inclined to depict as authoritarianism and support of antiquated notions, rightists themselves would likely depict as traditionalism and preservation of a strong moral bedrock that preserves order and stability.

[Noir]

So you came across a study that says that Conservitives tend to be...conservative?

Just wait till you get to the study on the Pope and his possible religiosity, it'll blow your mind.

[Agnapostate]

So you came across a study that says that Conservitives tend to be...conservative?

Just wait till you get to the study on the Pope and his possible religiosity, it'll blow your mind.

I'm not sure exactly how significant the differences are between British and American English that you have such significant reading comprehension difficulties on such a consistent basis, but no, I was examining the role of authoritarian, closeminded mentality.

[Noir]

I'm not sure exactly how significant the differences are between British and American English that you have such significant reading comprehension difficulties on such a consistent basis, but no, I was examining the role of authoritarian, closeminded mentality.

You were examining how people who are Conservative tend to be more authoritarian, more close-minded, less willing for change and reform and generally more, er, conservative.
Amiright?

[Agnapostate]

You were examining how people who are Conservative tend to be more authoritarian, more close-minded, less willing for change and reform and generally more, er, conservative.
Amiright?

As a former conservative (I would call myself a conservative if the label actually meant anything), I'd reject the labels of "authoritarian" and "close-minded" if I was a rightist myself. It's because dispute of the application of those labels exists that this research is conducted. Why would studies be commissioned to "investigate" commonly accepted views? :poke:

[Noir]

As a former conservative (I would call myself a conservative if the label actually meant anything), I'd reject the labels of "authoritarian" and "close-minded" if I was a rightist myself. It's because dispute of the application of those labels exists that this research is conducted. Why would studies be commissioned to "investigate" commonly accepted views? :poke:


A Conservtive Anarcist Communist? That'd boggle my mind.
Anyways, yeah I'd say those are commonly accepted views, just because there's a study about it doesn't mean they aren't.

[Agnapostate]

A Conservtive Anarcist Communist? That'd boggle my mind.

Um, anarchism implies conservatism? There's no massive overbearing state in the way.


Anyways, yeah I'd say those are commonly accepted views, just because there's a study about it doesn't mean they aren't.

That's nice, but they aren't here.

[Noir]

Um, anarchism implies conservatism? There's no massive overbearing state in the way.

You're having a laugh mate, from wiki..."Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society."

Now unless my grasp of English is even worse than you suggested earlier it seems pretty clear that Anarchy ain't quite in line with Conservitism, no?


That's nice, but they aren't here.

Where do you mean by "here"?

[DragonStryk72]

You're having a laugh mate, from wiki..."Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society."

Now unless my grasp of English is even worse than you suggested earlier it seems pretty clear that Anarchy ain't quite in line with Conservitism, no?



Where do you mean by "here"?

dude, seriously, he also claims to be a "libertarian" communist, sort of like Atheistic Christian. Just do what I did, slap him onto the ignore list, and watch your day improve.

[Agnapostate]

You're having a laugh mate, from wiki..."Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society."

Now unless my grasp of English is even worse than you suggested earlier it seems pretty clear that Anarchy ain't quite in line with Conservitism, no?

To the simpleminded, perhaps. Anarchism is fundamentally conservative because of its necessary association with minimal to no interference with the affairs of others, however: http://takimag.com/article/chomskys_inner_conservative/


Noam Chomsky’s new book, Hopes and Prospects, leads me to a conclusion that will startle his admirers and critics alike: Chomsky is a conservative. It might surprise him as well. After all, he is a socialist and a libertarian. The fundamental precept of his philosophy, which stems from a view of humans as free and creative beings, is that people should be left alone. While the managers of society may coerce and manipulate people, they can and should resist domination. Most conservatives, at least in the American tradition, believe the state should stay out of the lives of its citizens. Too many self-described conservatives insist that the government they can resist at home should involve itself in the lives of people in other countries. Dictating to others how to live is deeply unconservative. If the American government should stay out of the affairs of those of us who have the right to vote for and against it, how much more should it leave alone those with no say in its direction? The American federal government has, as Chomsky states in this enlightening series of essays, no more right to break into the houses of people in foreign lands than into your house in Kentucky or Alaska. Chomsky’s conservatism is more consistent than that of many who claim for themselves, which Chomsky certainly does not, the name conservative. He believes not only in the freedom of Americans, but in freedom from Americans.

A tad more sophisticated than regurgitating dictionary definitions, but maybe you'll catch on.


Where do you mean by "here"?

Here? That would be a reference to the more rightist political climate of this country compared to European liberal democracies.


dude, seriously, he also claims to be a "libertarian" communist, sort of like Atheistic Christian. Just do what I did, slap him onto the ignore list, and watch your day improve.

Druggin'Stink, as has been explained to you before, anarchists pioneered the political usage of the term "libertarian" more than a century before the misappropriation of the term by pseudo-libertarian frauds like you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_dejacque


Joseph Déjacque (December 1821, Paris – 1864, Paris) was a French anarcho-communist poet and writer. He sought to abolish "personal property, property in land, buildings, workshops, shops, property in anything that is an instrument of work, production or consumption."[1]

Déjacque was the first to employ the term libertarian in a political sense, in a letter written in 1857 criticizing Proudhon for an alleged attack on feminism and his support of individual ownership of the product of labor, and of a market economy, saying: "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature."[2]

Ergo, stop repeating stupid shit. :slap:

[Agnapostate]

So Noir lives in a country so leftist that he took it for granted that being authoritarian, closeminded, and dogmatic were simply synonymous with conservatism already. But then a certain self-identified rightist, so dumb and crude as to thank every post that seems to oppose mine, no matter how vacuous its content, 'thanked' Noir's post that those elements were already part and parcel of conservatism anyway! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Pagan]

dude, seriously, he also claims to be a "libertarian" communist, sort of like Atheistic Christian. Just do what I did, slap him onto the ignore list, and watch your day improve.

He also claims Anarchy is strictly a Socialist ideal and that the Inca Empire was Socialist. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

He's an Ignorant Fool who can't even get the shit strait that he tries to Parrot :lol::lol:

[Noir]

So Noir lives in a country so leftist that he took it for granted that being authoritarian, closeminded, and dogmatic were simply synonymous with conservatism already.

So are you willing to accept that Conservatism, the belief that traditional institutions should be keep in place and resistant to change. Are quiet unlike anarchists would want the abolition of the state institutions and want radical change, or not?

[fj1200]

I was examining the role of authoritarian, closeminded mentality.

Like Lefty Fascism? Oops, I repeated myself there.

[Little-Acorn]

Oh, goody, another thread where leftist fanatics try to tell conservatives what conservatives are. These are always good for a laugh.


The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change
And this one contains the usual fibs and wishful thinking. (yawn) Can't you people at least come up with some NEW lies for a change? This one is SO tired.....

Yeah, conservatives today are sure trying to keep government the same as it is now, aren't they.....:laugh: