I wonder. Has anyone ever done a study to compare the physical attractiveness of conservatives as compared to Marxists ?
Apparently the answer is yes, though I haven't bothered to check the study. See http://www.nerve.com/news/politics/conservative-politicans-hotter-than-liberal-ones-says-science Of course Marxists generally tend to denigrate conspicuous consumption (which is really just the advertising of competitive success and mate worthiness), and Feminists are in an age old battle against hot chicks. However competitiveness would involve more than just attractiveness. Don't forget, all of this evolved in a more primitive environment, where violence was the means of competition. You band together as a team, and raid the enemy to take their stuff, or keep the enemy from taking your stuff. If that is how you measure Competitiveness, you might be better off measuring propensity towards, and capability in, violence – especially group violence. A rough measure might be the overwhelming preponderance of Conservatives in the Military. See : Trowbridge, G. (2004). Poll: Today's military: right, republican and principled. Military Times. 05 January 2004. Available Online at: , . And Kohn, R. H. (1994). Out of control: the crisis in civil-military relations. The National Interest, 35(Spring 1994), 3–17. Although Liberal tendencies toward pacifism and Appeasement would also count as evidence. I still think the best argument for the theory of ideology as reproductive strategy is that r/K selection theory in animals revolves around three specific things. 1 Competition embrace or Competition avoidance 2 Promiscuity or Monogamy 3 Concern with carefully raising competitive offspring or lack of concern for offspring rearing Political ideology revolves around the same three things. 1 Embrace or avoidance of competition (in economics as Capitalism v Marxism, in War as Defense vs Pacifism, as well as everywhere else, from gun ownership/gun control to protection from offense through political correctness. 2 Abstinence until Monogamy vs Cultural Promiscuity 3 Careful child rearing through an embrace of “Family Values,” and children protected from indecency in culture, vs a lack of concern for child rearing (Tell a Lib your friend is a single transvestite male raising three kids, while swinging at a gay bar every night. They won't bat an eye, and will insist it may be a great rearing environment.) Add in that every aspect of K-selection comports with Conservatism, while every aspect of r-selection comports with Liberalism. It basically explains everything about how both ideologies would have inevitably formed within our species. What is best about this theory is it hits a very primal button in Libs. Conservatives don't seem to see the effect it will provoke in Libs, but Libs instinctively go apoplectic when they hear it. My theory on that is that the theory activates a neurological structure which they are trying to shield, through their embrace of Liberalism. As a result, they are backed into a corner. Embrace Liberalism, in the presence of this theory, which activates that structure, or abandon Liberalism, and let the structure get hit anyway by the threat of competitive defeat. Try it by explaining this theory to a Liberal, and see how they react. Check your Freepmail if you want a draft of a paper on this with more on the neurobiology.
Not sure why that didn't format. Let's try that again with tags.
Apparently the answer is yes, though I haven't bothered to check the study. See
http://www.nerve.com/news/politics/conservative-politicans-hotter-than-liberal-ones-says-science
Of course Marxists generally tend to denigrate conspicuous consumption (which is really just the advertising of competitive success and mate worthiness), and Feminists are in an age old battle against hot chicks.
However competitiveness would involve more than just attractiveness. Don't forget, all of this evolved in a more primitive environment, where violence was the means of competition. You band together as a team, and raid the enemy to take their stuff, or keep the enemy from taking your stuff.
If that is how you measure Competitiveness, you might be better off measuring propensity towards, and capability in, violence – especially group violence.
A rough measure might be the overwhelming preponderance of Conservatives in the Military. See :
Trowbridge, G. (2004). Poll: Today's military: right, republican and principled. Military Times. 05 January 2004. Available Online at: , .
And
Kohn, R. H. (1994). Out of control: the crisis in civil-military relations. The National Interest, 35(Spring 1994), 3–17.
Although Liberal tendencies toward pacifism and Appeasement would also count as evidence.
I still think the best argument for the theory of ideology as reproductive strategy is that r/K selection theory in animals revolves around three specific things.
1 Competition embrace or Competition avoidance
2 Promiscuity or Monogamy
3 Concern with carefully raising competitive offspring or lack of concern for offspring rearing
Political ideology revolves around the same three things.
1 Embrace or avoidance of competition (in economics as Capitalism v Marxism, in War as Defense vs Pacifism, as well as everywhere else, from gun ownership/gun control to protection from offense through political correctness.
2 Abstinence until Monogamy vs Cultural Promiscuity
3 Careful child rearing through an embrace of “Family Values,” and children protected from indecency in culture, vs a lack of concern for child rearing (Tell a Lib your friend is a single transvestite male raising three kids, while swinging at a gay bar every night. They won't bat an eye, and will insist it may be a great rearing environment.)
Add in that every aspect of K-selection comports with Conservatism, while every aspect of r-selection comports with Liberalism. It basically explains everything about how both ideologies would have inevitably formed within our species.
What is best about this theory is it hits a very primal button in Libs. Conservatives don't seem to see the effect it will provoke in Libs, but Libs instinctively go apoplectic when they hear it. My theory on that is that the theory activates a neurological structure which they are trying to shield, through their embrace of Liberalism. As a result, they are backed into a corner. Embrace Liberalism, in the presence of this theory, which activates that structure, or abandon Liberalism, and let the structure get hit anyway by the threat of competitive defeat. Try it by explaining this theory to a Liberal, and see how they react.
Check your Freepmail if you want a draft of a paper on this with more on the neurobiology.