I'm pretty convinced that it's retardation.

All political theories are idealistic since humans are corrupt. But any political stance we have is always based on how valid the political theories are at their root. Not what our elected officials do, but what they attempt to represent.

Conservative ideology is about true equality. Every man rises or falls based on his merits and is fully responsible for his choices and actions. This is the essense of being conservative. John F. Kennedy was a moderate conservative a by todays standards.

With today's liberalism, it should be obvious to anyone with average intelligence that government dependency through [insert name of program here] is exactly where we're headed. Unfortunately, Liberalism is evolving into socialism. Anyone who doubts this should read up on Marxism and do some comparisons.

People vote republican because they don't want the goverment telling them how to live their lives. People vote republican because believe that every man is equal. People vote republican because they believe in unity instead of diversity. People vote republican because they hope that the next president will do better than the last (GW) and represent conservative beliefs.

This is ironic, actually, since most liberals assume that conservatives are the ones trying to control them.

Yup, retardation. That and not reading up on Marx.

i like the way you link today's attempt at liberalism with Marxism, but neglect the connection between today's attempt at conservatism and fasicm.

...every man is equal ? Please.

Conservative ideology is about true equality.

Classical conversatism, sure.

Anything we've had lately? Not in the slightest.

i'll reread later, but stopped early when i got to:

People vote Republican because Republicans offer 'moral clarity'—a simple vision of good and evil that activates deep seated fears in much of the electorate. Democrats, in contrast, appeal to reason with their long-winded explorations of policy options for a complex world.

i had always thought this, but it's interesting seeing it from a psych person.

during the whole 'kerry is a flip-flopper' thing i kept thinking 'who wouldn't want someone to change their mind when given new information?' i guess the concept of re-evaluation is too complex for some.

'People vote republican because they don't want the goverment telling them how to live their lives.'??

Hmmm don't these ^ people want to vote for Ron Paul? I thought Republicans liked getting told what to do, what wars to fight, what books to burn, etc?

Modern conservatism is all about pandering to the right for votes, putting big business in control of lawmaking and the elimination of the middle classes which, ironically, is largely made up of the modern slack jawed GOD GUN FAG driven idiot that comes out in droves to vote for their red team.

McCain's pick of Palin was genius in that these idiots now have a chick in a star spangled bikini toting a large firearm to vote for. It's a no brainer for the sheeple with limited brain capacity with which to examine the issues at hand and how their voting decisions will impact their own position in the food chain. Even Carl Rove couldn't have picked a better Jesus lovin' fundie magnet... and I'm not saying he didn't pick this one.

Re-read my fitst paragraph. Opinion of politial theory shouldn't be skewed by a few corrupt individuals who claim to represent something but act in a completely different manner.

Yes, conservatism IS about TRUE equality. Every man will rise or fall based on his merits. Liberalism imposes equality by penalizing the successful and rewarding the unsuccessful.

OK...

But any political stance we have is always based on how valid the political theories are at their root. Not what our elected officials do, but what they attempt to represent.

You're trying to bridge theory and practice. The idea of conservatism is nifty but not if the only people claiming to represent it are lying. Ideas without workable manifestations are just words inside your head.

Yes, in theory, leprechauns rock the house. Unfortunately, in practice, all they do is they steal me lucky charms.

Stop reading the definition and look at the actual practice of said sides in a real world. If you bible thumpers would stop putting your Jesus into our politics and calling it conservative, we heathen liberals will stop cooking and eating your children wile assfucking one another and praying to science.

The real world application of these two entities is what dip-shits who are middle class (or impoverished) while voting Republican tend to miss.

May you have another 4 to 8 years of getting fucked by a shrinking $, job losses, war debt and mega-corporation bail-outs? Well, yes you may. Just vote for the red team.

People vote republican because they don't want the goverment telling them how to live their lives. People vote republican because believe that every man is equal. People vote republican because they believe in unity instead of diversity.

What republican party are you basing this on? Because the current one is ALL about the government telling people what is and isn't right. It's ALL about dividing different groups and treading on the rights of a large minority for the (obviously) larger majority. I'm not really sure what you're basing your analysis on. The tenets of conservatism may fall slightly more in line with your analysis but I still do not see the inherent unity in even textbook conservatism.

conservative or liberal, both canidates make me want to strangle puppies.

Unfortunately, Liberalism is evolving into socialism.

cryogeneric, what do you mean by 'unfortunately'?

Hmm, a battle between two definitions of morality; individualism vs collective stability.
Yet, it seems to me that both parties actually accept both premises. Additionally, the reason people vote for a particular party seems like it would be more accurately explained by defining chunks of the partisan electorate. Meaning, the way a party frames morality, or the complexity of the world, may just appeal to parts of the parties.

I recall a conversation I had with a friend's father about why we was voting for Bush Jr. in 2004, he stated to me that he didn't really like either candidate but he felt Bush would handle the war better than Kerry; it was a 'gut feeling.'

Curiously, I don't think this had a lot to do with perceptions of morality, religion, or world complexity. Well, I suppose it would in a broad sense but one can support running a war well as a Democrat or a Republican with relative ease. And it seems to me that a lot of people don't really like either party but still vote one way or another because of a few issues or intuitions. Some of which are neutral to typical moral frameworks (e.g.: energy independence, global warming, etc).

I don't think this is anything contrary to what the author wrote, but rather it seems a bit underplayed.

Vote RON PAUL......for real change.

68rebel: 'Vote RON PAUL......for real change.'

Your bait is rotted and ineffective.

This is a cool article. The morality tests links are kinda groovy ,too. (so far I only took one of 'em.)

You're trying to bridge theory and practice. The idea of conservatism is nifty but not if the only people claiming to represent it are lying. Ideas without workable manifestations are just words inside your head.

On the contrary, I'm trying to separate theory and practice... as it should be. For example, if Obama is elected and acts contrary to liberal beliefs subsequently becoming the worst US president in history, would you blame him or Liberalism?

I don't think we can condemn a politcal theory because an individual whose supposed to represent it, AND DOES NOT, screws up.

On the other hand, there isn't much value in upholding a political theory if you can't really find anyone who enacts it.

I'm reminded of this thing this kid Bart did once in scouts. Bart was the quintessential uncool nerd type who didn't have any friends (this is not the part I'm reminded of, FYI). One weekend-long scouting trip, I found myself walking way behind all the other scouts, back where Bart tended to lurk. We got talking about video games. He was telling me all about his favorite video game, something for his C64, and I can almost remember the name -- it was some vaguely RPG-flavored thing that sounded kinda cool. So Bart is talking, and talking, and talking (he didn't get to do this very often) about this game, his very favorite, with all these cool characters you get to play, and their cool weapons, and the cool quest, and I'm asking him about it, and suddenly something I ask prompts Bart to reveal that he hasn't actually played the game yet; his mom bought it for him on the way to the scouting trip, and he's clutching it like a holy symbol of warding +5 vs unpleasant experiences.

What Bart was doing there was neatly separating theory and practice.

A+++ for vasudeva stories; would read again

On the other hand, there isn't much value in upholding a political theory if you can't really find anyone who enacts it.

Only if that's true. We just don't have any recent examples--and this is pretty much the case for any elected politician regardless of party. Unless of course you vote Democrat because you are, in fact, a socialist.

And the question, after all, was why do people vote republican, not which flavor is the neatest for abstract reasons.

Also this is allowing the polite fiction that people vote for rational and coherent reasons. People vote however they vote for largely stupid reasons and then find ways to justify it, just like a lot of other decisions.

Currently, people vote republican because they think if they don't, terrorists will get us. They vote republican because they buy the 'death tax' quip and think it might apply to them. They vote republican because they think Kerry was a Frenchman or fag and Gore wants to have invented the Internet and Obama is a muslim. They vote republican because that's what daddy always did and Chet down at the store sure has a lot of authoritative-sounding things to say about those lieberals.

In short: out of fear, stupidity, and the desire to be the same brand of right as the people they consider their peers, with the emphasis on 'same' and not so much on 'right'.

And the question, after all, was why do people vote republican, not which flavor is the neatest for abstract reasons.

Agreed. We have been discussing my comment on theory vs. practice because you questioned it, but my first comment offered an alternative to the article. It alludes to the decision to vote republican as some kind of moralistic and psychological deficiency. That's ridiculous. There's nothing illogical or wrong with voting republican. Someone can vote republican simply because they believe in equality and capitalism. They might also vote republican because they don't like the direction of the liberal party, which is becoming socialism. No moral or psychological interpretations are necessary here.

Also this is allowing the polite fiction that people vote for rational and coherent reasons. People vote however they vote for largely stupid reasons and then find ways to justify it, just like a lot of other decisions.

I'm sure thats true in some cases and regardless of party. As for everyone, though, that’s a very general, and unfounded, statement.

Currently, people vote republican because they think if they don't, terrorists will get us. They vote republican because they buy the 'death tax' quip and think it might apply to them. They vote republican because they think Kerry was a Frenchman or fag and Gore wants to have invented the Internet and Obama is a muslim. They vote republican because that's what daddy always did and Chet down at the store sure has a lot of authoritative-sounding things to say about those lieberals. In short: out of fear, stupidity, and the desire to be the same brand of right as the people they consider their peers, with the emphasis on 'same' and not so much on 'right'.

Well, this is just your irrational opinion. You obviously know very little about republicans and why someone might vote that way.

You read like you have some Beautiful South Pacific Black Pearls to sell or would like me to consider the leather wristband. You may want to post a journal entry about it. (Don't forget not to link.)

Someone can vote republican simply because they believe in equality and capitalism. They might also vote republican because they don't like the direction of the liberal party, which is becoming socialism. No moral or psychological interpretations are necessary here.

I was willing to give your wierdly robotic chin-stroking the benefit of the doubt re: astroturfing, but I really can't at this point. Do you generally troll wikipedia or something? We like our trolls a little more sassy here -- a little less political philosophy 101 and a little more heavy metal vomit party. Thanks in advance.

I simply stated my opinion to this aritlce and you asserted that people vote republican out of fear and stupidity...

who's the one trolling here?

who indeed

*faces the west, looks thoughtful

if you believe that people are rational and make rational decisions, then you are a fucking moron and you don't understand human nature, cognition, or sociology in the slightest

which actually makes you libertarian, so congrats on your newfound belief system!

if you believe that people are rational and make rational decisions, then you are a fucking moron and you don't understand human nature, cognition, or sociology in the slightest

So every decision a person makes is irrational? Interesting.

which actually makes you libertarian, so congrats on your newfound belief system

Oh, of course. Assuming a dislike of excessive government control can somehow translate to the desire for absolute government control. Yes, I see the connection.

If I may,

Human beings are not rational, not at all. Maybe, sometimes we act rationally, like when sailing through algebra equations or installing a toilet - at those times we slip into a rational state where everything lines up neatly in our head like some sort of jellied electromagnet.

At those times, the monkey/reptile/rat brain releases its hold on our actions. Most of the time, it sits on our prefrontal cortex like John Wayne and and kicks us in the side so we will continue to eat and fuck and punch assholes in the throat.

Like now, for instance, in this thread, you were attempting to be cold and logical, sticking to the facts and spewing forth stainless steel dogmatic reason. Then, you were assaulted by legitimate threats to your mental constructs. Thus, you began to defend those constructs even though you could see the merit of your opponent's barbs.

It's a natural response. The typical human mind is a cluster of complex reality constructs, many of which compete with one another for dominance - like a large government with many departments, each marginally aware of the other.

The internal friction arising from a threat to an established construct triggers an automatic emotional defense mechanism causing you to refuse to back down from a clearly flawed perspective.

Often, later on, when no one is looking, the mind rearranges and absorbs the new information - becoming stronger and wiser without having to admit to anyone you were acting like a cumloaf.

Go ahead, visit some heated Internet forum debates, and you will see this behavior over and over again. Early on the arguments are point/counterpoint, then one party shits in its hand, then the other party points this out, then the first party rubs the shit on their face and gets mad, then the other party points out both the shit and the irrational fecal face painting display, and from this point on nothing new is added to the argument because the shit-face party is only concerned with feeling as confident in their faulty perspective as they were before they posted despite the nearly unconscious knowledge they are going to eventually be forced to retreat, as mentioned above, and reevaluate their beliefs.

I urge you, go ahead and do this now. Go to your internal rock garden and rake it so you can realize no political ideology ever stands up in practice the way it does in theory, and to stand in the stream of time, knowing as best you can the specific conditions which influence the way our political parties affect our lives at this moment, to vote for a party because you hope the candidate chosen will adhere to academically defined principles of the political system they cosmetically represent is the kind of thing dumb fucks do.

then the first party rubs the shit on their face and gets mad

Goddamnit, now I'm kinda jealous I didn't do this first, because it sounds like a fucking hardcore thing to do in the middle of a discussion that's just about to start going nowhere.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, smear, THE CIRCUS IS ABOUT TO BEGIN, RAWRRRRRR, stomp around like rageful dinosaur covered in feces

WELCOME TO THUNDA DOME!!!

Here's the TED talk this guy gives -- basically this article boiled down to a 20-minute presentation.

nice; will have to watch later today.

In retrospect, this was easily the coolest thing I read all week.

stomp around like rageful dinosaur covered in feces

GG Allin already played that shit out, yo.