Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Liberal/Conservative Divide Explained - Paranoia
Deprogramming Liberalism ^ | February 17, 2013 | Jim Autio

Posted on 02/17/2013 9:22:01 AM PST by DeprogramLiberalism

Professor George Lakoff describes himself as a cognitive scientist. In his book, Moral Politics How Liberals and Conservatives Think, Professor Lakoff illustrates the problem of accurately describing the dichotomy between contemporary liberalism and contemporary conservatism in America. From the section, The Worldview Problem for Cognitive Science in chapter two:

~The job of the cognitive scientist in this instance is to characterize the largely unconscious liberal and conservative worldviews accurately enough so that an analyst can see just why the puzzles for liberals are not puzzles for conservatives, and conversely. Any cognitive scientist who seeks to describe the conservative and liberal worldviews is constrained by at least two adequacy conditions.~

While I do not label myself a cognitive scientist, it seems that I do what a cognitive scientist does - study patterns of thinking. I have intently studied the dichotomies that separate contemporary liberalism and conservatism in America for many years. So, can my conclusions pass his requirements? We'll see...

~First, the worldviews must make the collections of political stands on each side into two natural categories. For example, the liberal worldview analysis must explain why environmentalism, feminism, support for social programs, and progressive taxation fit naturally together for liberals, while the conservative worldview analysis must explain why their opposites fit together naturally for conservatives.~

I have described the dichotomies between liberalism and conservatism in my Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series as based on this:

We are all born with an innate desire to direct our own lives (with very rare exceptions). This is a core belief. A young conservative develops by growing up with a balance of influence (family, friends, education, religion, etc.) during his life supporting this belief. So when he comes of ideological age he still retains his original inborn desire to direct his own life, and that all others be provided that same opportunity as well. This is the description of an ideology based on individual liberty - a freedom to direct one's own life.

The liberal, on the other hand, mutates away from his inborn core belief, growing up being conditioned to fear directing his own life. This happens in a response to early childhood experiences, his parent's influence, his friends, his schooling, his religion or lack thereof, the news media he is exposed to, social media, etc. This gradually conditioned, ingrained paranoia explains why liberals almost always desire solutions to personal and societal problems that involve giving up their own individual liberty (directing their own life), and giving up everyone else's as well - think Obamacare. In exchange they desperately seek for a perceived safe solution that they hope will assuage their fears. This almost always results in collectivist solutions at the cost of individual liberty where the collective directs peoples' lives through big-mommy government policies. The ultimate goal for the liberal is to create a safe utopia run by mommy figures that will scare away all of the perceived evil monsters that their liberal paranoia imagines are out there, so they are willing to give themselves (and everyone else) over to this type of voluntary slavery.

I would say that my explanation fully satisfies Professor Lakoff's first requirement of explaining opposite issue positions. His second requirement:

~Second, any adequate descriptions of these two world-views must show why the puzzles for liberals are not puzzles for conservatives, and conversely. As we shall see, this is anything but an easy problem and there are to my knowledge no previous solutions to it.~

Actually it is an easy problem to solve. Conservatives do not understand why liberals are puzzled about certain things that seem obvious to conservatives, because conservatives do not share the acquired paranoia of liberals. And vice versa. The second of Professor Lakoff's requirements too, I would say is fully satisfied.

~But there is a third, far more demanding, adequacy condition on the characterization of conservative and liberal worldviews. Those worldviews must additionally explain the topic choice, word choice, and discourse forms of conservatives and liberals. In short, those worldviews must explain just how conservative forms of reasoning make sense to conservatives, and the same for liberals. Moreover, they must explain why liberals and conservatives choose different topics to discuss and use different words in their discourse to discuss them. Furthermore they must explain why sometimes the same words have very different meanings when used by liberals and conservatives.~

Again, this is elementary to my premise of an inherent liberal paranoia explaining the dichotomies dividing liberalism and conservatism. Liberals and conservatives see the world through completely different sets of glasses. The conservative looks through the clear lenses of his inborn desire to direct his own life and describes the world in that way. The liberal's lenses are clouded with fear, which naturally taints his thinking and conception of the world. He sees very different colors, contrasts and shades from the conservative, and describes them in those separate terms. Quite simply, take away the paranoia from a liberal and you end up with a conservative - he immediately reverts back to his core belief of a desire to direct his own life. All of conservatism that once seemed like nonsense as a liberal looking through paranoia-tinted glasses, all of a sudden makes perfect sense when the glasses are exchanged for those with the bold, uncluttered view of individual liberty. What once seemed logical as a liberal who fears almost everything, now seems, silly, self-defeating, and even counterproductive.

It would seem that the explanation of a societal conditioning of paranoia dividing the contemporary liberal from the contemporary conservative completely and simply fulfills all three of Professor Lakoff's requirements. I would say that his search for an adequate explanation for the dichotomies between liberalism and conservatism is over. I suggest that Professor Lakoff read the Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series for much more insight into the liberal/conservative divide (as should every liberal and conservative). For the conservative the essay series is an ideological reference library like no other, including practical tactics for bringing liberals to our side. For the liberal it is a polite, personable exit counseling process of self-re-education designed to completely remove the inherent paranoia that is the foundation of contemporary liberalism in America.


TOPICS: Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: conservatism; ideology; liberalism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: Lancey Howard
All valid points, many of which I expound on in the N.C. Essay Series. But, really, this thread is not so much about what liberals do, but about why liberals do them.
21 posted on 02/17/2013 10:35:21 AM PST by DeprogramLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Washi
The leaders of the left don't appear to fear directing their own lives, as long as they also get to direct others' lives. They want to impose their will on others. These are the same types that gravitate toward positions of petty power, like home owner's association boards. They have very strong opinions about how everyone else should live.

A communistic planned economy is very attractive to those who are arrogant enough to think that THEY will be the planners.

22 posted on 02/17/2013 12:20:25 PM PST by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DeprogramLiberalism
But think about the conservative high school student that goes off to college and comes home a few years later a liberal activist. They weren’t born that way. The evolved into it.

My response is that weakness of character makes people followers, eager to jump on "the bandwagon", whatever that happens to be. And that may simply be the old knee-jerk "safety in numbers" mentality. Weak people like to look around and see that they are surrounded by "friends" - - they're "safe", and liked, and with the "in" crowd.

Liberals are very easily manipulated and therefore prone to fall face-first for whatever propaganda the Democrat "mainstream" newsrooms happen to be pushing for their party this week.

23 posted on 02/17/2013 12:27:15 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DeprogramLiberalism

Bump


24 posted on 02/17/2013 12:31:45 PM PST by fanfan ("If Muslim kids were asked to go to church on Sunday and take Holy Communion there would be war.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Those are mostly symptoms. What you see as defective liberal character traits I see as universal failures that can apply to people of any ideology. Possibly liberalism attracts people of weaker character, but my research tells me that it is more that the ingrained paranoia of liberalism produces symptoms that can be classified as weak character.

The fact that liberals can become conservatives, with a noticable improvemnt in their attitude and behavior as a result of the switch seems to be evidence for my conclusion.

I invite you to read my essays if you truly wish to get my take on liberalism.


25 posted on 02/17/2013 12:44:50 PM PST by DeprogramLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DeprogramLiberalism
The foundation of liberal thinking is only one emotion - fear.

And liberals say that fear is the foundation of conservatism (unless it's greed).

You can google "fear and conservatism" and see what you come up with.

The truth is that caution or prudence is a natural and necessary part of life.

Understanding that things can and will and do go wrong in schemes of remaking society is the beginning of wisdom -- and of conservatism.

Recognizing that there are limits to how far one can make one's own life and destiny doesn't make one a coward or an idiot or a liberal either.

If you're forced to make the choice a liberalism based on "fear" is probably less dangerous than one based on "hope."

You can have a rational argument with somebody who's not enthusiastic about market forces.

That's not always possible with people who are passionate about collective power and utopian social engineering.

26 posted on 02/17/2013 1:07:26 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

“Unless of course your name is George W. Bush. The liberals couldn’t decide if Dubya was stupid, or evil, or both.”

You could plug Obama’s name in there and substitute conservatives for liberals and have the same sentence. I don’t know why anyone thinks Obama is stupid. He is smart in that he has figured out that a large portion of the electorate are stupid enough to believe his evil path is for their good.


27 posted on 02/17/2013 1:23:10 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian (One "bitter clinger" praying for revival. <BCC><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: x
And liberals say that fear is the foundation of conservatism (unless it's greed).

You can google "fear and conservatism" and see what you come up with.

You think I don't know that? I have studied this subject for over a decade with 22 thoroughly researched essays under my belt. I have not drawn these conclusions lightly.

The truth is that caution or prudence is a natural and necessary part of life.

There you go again, throwing things at me as if I am some child. Again, do you honestly believe that I am so infantile that I don't know these things? The rest of your statements seem in the same vein.

I am simply not interested in discussing this with you.

28 posted on 02/17/2013 1:30:50 PM PST by DeprogramLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
not to mention the concentrated Democrat parasite nests known as "cities"

Population density explains the majority of leftism. Living in a city or city-like environment makes government-reliant envious leftists out of ANY demographic, living in the country makes mostly self-reliant conservatives. To fight leftism, fight the formation of geographic overpopulation. With the internet, the high-rise city loses its role as an economic hub.

29 posted on 02/17/2013 5:31:43 PM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hulagirl

Maybe you meant “KinderGarden Of Eden”?


30 posted on 02/17/2013 6:47:24 PM PST by X-spurt (Republic of Texas, Come and Take It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Washi

That is very good!

Of course the reasons, just the same as with Soviet Communism, that leaders of the left don’t appear to fear directing their own lives, as long as they also get to direct others’ lives, is because they assume there is finite bounty to be had and they as leaders deserve the lion’s share.

Whereas conservatives, as Reagan so sintinctly stated much better than I, is it is not finite bounty or zero sum gain, rather productive input increases the size of the pie.


31 posted on 02/17/2013 7:05:02 PM PST by X-spurt (Republic of Texas, Come and Take It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
To fight leftism, fight the formation of geographic overpopulation.

Exactly. The rats understand this basic concept as well, and have been fighting for decades to PROMOTE cities and denser populations by increasing gasoline prices and other means in their efforts to smash everybody into "public transportation". There have been numerous lefty articles about how to craft policy to benefit cities and keep people in nice, controllable "population centers".

The scumbag liberals love "villages" and "communities" (commune - ities) precisely because they are easier to manipulate, propagandize, and control. And, of course, TAX.

This typical county-by-county post-election map says it all. The scumbag Democrats are all crammed into those blue, tiny little concentrated parasite nests.


32 posted on 02/17/2013 7:29:36 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

It is not good to assume liberals are stupid and unthinking. Instead we should recognize that even the common low level liberal figures the leadership liberals will take care of them, they will get ‘their fair share” of the bounty or will somehow be recognized as part of liberal leadship and that the greedy conservatives will be the ones cut out of the deal.

Liberals are paranoid, because intuitively they know that common sense says their way really won’t work. They do suffer from projection, accusing us of what they actually do. They are greedy in knowing liberalism is not productive, but they will just take what they rightly deserve from whatever the bounty is.

Liberal leadership enlists the lower level liberals to keep them as leaders by offering them some of the spoils, but just some and always a promise of more after the next successful election.


33 posted on 02/17/2013 7:40:41 PM PST by X-spurt (Republic of Texas, Come and Take It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: X-spurt

Yes! I thought of that afterwards. Great book but I just can’t remember that title!


34 posted on 03/10/2013 1:13:38 PM PDT by hulagirl (Mother Theresa was right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson