![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
spoonlessI was thinking yesterday, while driving to Chicago, about how people who class themselves in particular political groups tend have very similar traits in terms of how they think about things.
Now, before I go any further with this, I'll be the first to say that this type of analysis is exactly the thing that is highly prone to over-generalization and stereotyping and all that bad stuff. Also, no doubt my own assessment of it is warped by my perspective and someone coming from another perspective may have a completely different assessment of it. Also, no matter what I say on this, it's sure to offend *someone* so well... I apologize in advance but I'm gonna tell it like I see it.
Nevertheless, I find myself noticing the same patterns again and again, and some of these really stuck out to me as I was thinking about it yesterday. So I figure, why not try to flesh them out in a post and see if anyone else notices the same thing? Or if others have noticed very different things?
First, let me just list out the various groups I'm thinking of... even this is somewhat arbitrary, but most people I run across tend to fall into one of these 5 groups, or at least lean toward one of them more than the others. First, there are the Liberals. A stereotypical liberal would be an academic in the natural sciences: pro capitalism, but also in favor of a moderately large role for government in things like education, science, protecting the environment, protecting human rights, and providing a social safety net. Second, there are the (right-) Libertarians. A stereotypical Libertarian would be an internet startup founder. Rabidly pro capitalism, highly individualistic, in favor of minimalist government, isolationism, skeptical of government role in public education, science, the environment, and against a social safety net and progressive taxation. Third there are the Leftists. A stereotypical Leftist would be an academic in a literature or art department): anti capitalism, anti corporations, pro workers rights, radical feminism, strongly pro environmental protection, pro animal rights activism, against globalization, anti technology, and either in favor of very big (Marxist-Leninists) or very small (left-anarchists) government. Forth, there is the Religious Right. A stereotypical person from the Religious Right would be an evangelical Christian: strongly pro life on abortion, anti homosexual, anti evolution, pro prayer in school, anti pornography and foul language, anti separation of Church and State. And Fifth, there are the Neo-Conservatives. Stereotypical neo conservative would be a wealthy Jewish guy who grew up in an academic culture and decided most academics are full of shit later in life: pro capitalism and pro globalization, pro military intervention, anti affirmative action and multiculturalism, either weakly opposed to or weakly in favor of social safety nets, opposed to "positive" human rights, usually weakly in favor of religion as a "noble lie" to help guide the masses.
I know, there are a lot more than those 5 camps, even just in the US. For example, there are the paleo-conservatives (anti-immigration, anti globalization, pro protectionism, often racist...), but I haven't met enough of them or read enough of them to be at all familiar with how their brains work. Looking at political groups in other countries makes the whole thing even more complicated, so let's just stick with those 5.
Now let's break down the brain in terms of left brain and right brain, left brain doing symbol processing such as logic and mathematics and analytic thinking, right brain doing more holistic integration, processing emotions and empathy, spiritual or artistic thought, and visualization. (Even more of a simplification, perhaps.) It seems to me that those in the Libertarian camp usually tend to have strong left brain skills and weak right brain skills. Their logical brains tend to think in terms of economics and rational self interest, but have trouble dealing with things like empathy and social interdependence, emergent systemic societal problems such as inequality, environmental degradation, and class warfare. On the contrary, those in the Leftist camp tend to have strong right brain skills and weak left brain skills. Their heart is in the right place, and they perhaps have a deep understanding of human nature, but they tend to ignore or misunderstand economic and practical realities. I know I may be biased here, but my impression is that Liberals tend to have both strong left brain and strong right brain skills. (Although perhaps neither is quite as pronounced as it is in the two forementioned groups?) The Religious Right tends to be composed of people who have both weak leftbrained skills AND weak rightbrained skills. In other words, just generally dumb people. (Although that doesn't mean they don't have a good heart--many of them do--they just happen to be mentally retarded.) Interestingly, I do notice some similarities between the religious right and the far left, and I think the similarities may stem from them both being bad at math and logical thinking. Both, for instance, tend to be very skeptical of science and technology, and prone to superstition.
That covers the first 4 groups. What about the 5th group, Neo-Conservatives? Hmmm.... perhaps I don't know them well enough yet either to place them somewhere. I tend to think of them as prone to overconfidence, and prone to black and white thinking. Actually, the issue of seeing things in black-and-white versus grayish or more complex is another issue I wanted to bring up here that I did think about a lot yesterday too, although it's now getting late and I have to run an errand before bed rather than write that out. I do think that thinking in terms of black-and-white fits in here in some important way. Perhaps there are even two characteristics that lead to it... one is a tendency for precise thinking and the other is a tendency for overconfidence. I think the J/P divide matters here a lot. To be continued!
And yes, sorry if you fit into one of these camps where I stereotyped or offended you. Feel free to share your own impression of how these different groups think.
Now, before I go any further with this, I'll be the first to say that this type of analysis is exactly the thing that is highly prone to over-generalization and stereotyping and all that bad stuff. Also, no doubt my own assessment of it is warped by my perspective and someone coming from another perspective may have a completely different assessment of it. Also, no matter what I say on this, it's sure to offend *someone* so well... I apologize in advance but I'm gonna tell it like I see it.
Nevertheless, I find myself noticing the same patterns again and again, and some of these really stuck out to me as I was thinking about it yesterday. So I figure, why not try to flesh them out in a post and see if anyone else notices the same thing? Or if others have noticed very different things?
First, let me just list out the various groups I'm thinking of... even this is somewhat arbitrary, but most people I run across tend to fall into one of these 5 groups, or at least lean toward one of them more than the others. First, there are the Liberals. A stereotypical liberal would be an academic in the natural sciences: pro capitalism, but also in favor of a moderately large role for government in things like education, science, protecting the environment, protecting human rights, and providing a social safety net. Second, there are the (right-) Libertarians. A stereotypical Libertarian would be an internet startup founder. Rabidly pro capitalism, highly individualistic, in favor of minimalist government, isolationism, skeptical of government role in public education, science, the environment, and against a social safety net and progressive taxation. Third there are the Leftists. A stereotypical Leftist would be an academic in a literature or art department): anti capitalism, anti corporations, pro workers rights, radical feminism, strongly pro environmental protection, pro animal rights activism, against globalization, anti technology, and either in favor of very big (Marxist-Leninists) or very small (left-anarchists) government. Forth, there is the Religious Right. A stereotypical person from the Religious Right would be an evangelical Christian: strongly pro life on abortion, anti homosexual, anti evolution, pro prayer in school, anti pornography and foul language, anti separation of Church and State. And Fifth, there are the Neo-Conservatives. Stereotypical neo conservative would be a wealthy Jewish guy who grew up in an academic culture and decided most academics are full of shit later in life: pro capitalism and pro globalization, pro military intervention, anti affirmative action and multiculturalism, either weakly opposed to or weakly in favor of social safety nets, opposed to "positive" human rights, usually weakly in favor of religion as a "noble lie" to help guide the masses.
I know, there are a lot more than those 5 camps, even just in the US. For example, there are the paleo-conservatives (anti-immigration, anti globalization, pro protectionism, often racist...), but I haven't met enough of them or read enough of them to be at all familiar with how their brains work. Looking at political groups in other countries makes the whole thing even more complicated, so let's just stick with those 5.
Now let's break down the brain in terms of left brain and right brain, left brain doing symbol processing such as logic and mathematics and analytic thinking, right brain doing more holistic integration, processing emotions and empathy, spiritual or artistic thought, and visualization. (Even more of a simplification, perhaps.) It seems to me that those in the Libertarian camp usually tend to have strong left brain skills and weak right brain skills. Their logical brains tend to think in terms of economics and rational self interest, but have trouble dealing with things like empathy and social interdependence, emergent systemic societal problems such as inequality, environmental degradation, and class warfare. On the contrary, those in the Leftist camp tend to have strong right brain skills and weak left brain skills. Their heart is in the right place, and they perhaps have a deep understanding of human nature, but they tend to ignore or misunderstand economic and practical realities. I know I may be biased here, but my impression is that Liberals tend to have both strong left brain and strong right brain skills. (Although perhaps neither is quite as pronounced as it is in the two forementioned groups?) The Religious Right tends to be composed of people who have both weak leftbrained skills AND weak rightbrained skills. In other words, just generally dumb people. (Although that doesn't mean they don't have a good heart--many of them do--they just happen to be mentally retarded.) Interestingly, I do notice some similarities between the religious right and the far left, and I think the similarities may stem from them both being bad at math and logical thinking. Both, for instance, tend to be very skeptical of science and technology, and prone to superstition.
That covers the first 4 groups. What about the 5th group, Neo-Conservatives? Hmmm.... perhaps I don't know them well enough yet either to place them somewhere. I tend to think of them as prone to overconfidence, and prone to black and white thinking. Actually, the issue of seeing things in black-and-white versus grayish or more complex is another issue I wanted to bring up here that I did think about a lot yesterday too, although it's now getting late and I have to run an errand before bed rather than write that out. I do think that thinking in terms of black-and-white fits in here in some important way. Perhaps there are even two characteristics that lead to it... one is a tendency for precise thinking and the other is a tendency for overconfidence. I think the J/P divide matters here a lot. To be continued!
And yes, sorry if you fit into one of these camps where I stereotyped or offended you. Feel free to share your own impression of how these different groups think.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-05-17 07:33 pm (UTC)I feel like an important distinction here boils down to being comitted to ones' convictions out of ideology or pragmatism.
agreed
Idealistic libertarians tend to be anarchists and reject the authority of government outright , as anarcho-capitalists. Pragmatic libertarians tend to be minarchists
I think
But yes, in general I think you're right.
I would say libertarian and not Libertarian. These are discrete groups. You also sometimes capitalize liberal or conservative, and this confuses me. Not sure if these are distinct from their lowercase forms or not.
I capitalized Libertarian in part because I feel like when it is capitalized it is more associated with rightwing libertarianism. There are also libertarian socialists, which would fall under my Leftists category, and for the purposes of this discussion I was not considering them. In the US, using the word libertarian often is synonymous with rightwing libertarianism. Of course, I realize that that is broader than just whatever the Libertarian party states is their agenda.
I capitalized all 5 categories also just to emphasize the 5 different groups and to define what I meant by each of those groups. I think if I used lowercase names for each of them, there would be a lot more overlap and confusion. So the way I thought about it was that I was sort of defining 5 archetypal points in "ideological space", and then the categories are in the neighborhood of those points.