Thanks for your comments. One interpretation of liberalism is that it tends to be more common when there is less fear of consequences for one’s actions. If one believes one can have frequent, casual sexual encounters without the outcome of obligation as a parent or debilitating disease, then one can believe that’s ok behavior and support rules that promote that societally. If you don’t have to suffer the broad and negative consequences of paying for lavish government spending, then you can reap the mild psychological benefit of imagining it helps somebody somewhere. If a gov’t rule bans the property of someone other than yourself and you don’t see any threat to your personal safety, then you can easily be fooled into illogical justifications for the ban. And on it goes.
Yep. Liberalism is actually an advantageous strategy, from Darwin’s perspective, if actions don’t have consequences.
Sex, food, etc are all good to do, if there is no consequences to doing it freely.
It is only when resources tighten up, that the guy who mates with just any girl will see his numerous offspring killed off by the guy who selects a mate carefully, and monopolizes her with monogamy, to produce a fitter kid.
Likewise with fighting. The guy who avoids fights does well, if he can get food elsewhere. But once the only people who eat are the ones who fight, you see that culled back too.