THE LIBERAL THREAD #3- No Debate Please

Status
Not open for further replies.
Didn't you know that have hope was so passe'? No hope for you! :lmao:

Let the good times roll my friend :rotfl:

As I've become interested in how people think and why, here's some good reading for the morning, there's more at the article, and there are more articles to be had, but this one was most straight forward, I'm glad I don't live out of fear.

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

By Kathleen Maclay, Media Relations | 22 July 2003 (revised 7/25/03)

BERKELEY – Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the Vietnam War to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations?

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

* Fear and aggression
* Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
* Uncertainty avoidance
* Need for cognitive closure
* Terror management

"From our perspective, these psychological factors are capable of contributing to the adoption of conservative ideological contents, either independently or in combination," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin.

Assistant Professor Jack Glaser of the University of California, Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy and Visiting Professor Frank Sulloway of UC Berkeley joined lead author, Associate Professor John Jost of Stanford University's Graduate School of Business, and Professor Arie Kruglanski of the University of Maryland at College Park, to analyze the literature on conservatism.

The psychologists sought patterns among 88 samples, involving 22,818 participants, taken from journal articles, books and conference papers. The material originating from 12 countries included speeches and interviews given by politicians, opinions and verdicts rendered by judges, as well as experimental, field and survey studies.


Researchers help define what makes a political conservative

I hate to say this, but when I read it, I couldn't help thinking about 80% of all men I knew in the military. And I say this having no issue with these people, it's just that's how they seem to work. It's uncanny how on target it is.
 
Good morning libs!



I like to think of myself as a butch democrat, but some people would argue that princess:



OrlandoMike is one of my heroes (and mixes up a mean drink!)

As for that cafepress, I liked these.. :rotfl:

305470002v1_350x350_Front.jpg


308621969v4_350x350_Front_Color-AshGrey.jpg


And my favorite...

301042407v5_350x350_Front.jpg


(That last one also availabe on panties or boxers)

Oh, you're bad.;)
 
Did that Berkeley article get its own thread? It should :bitelip:
 

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

By Kathleen Maclay, Media Relations | 22 July 2003 (revised 7/25/03)

BERKELEY – Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the Vietnam War to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations?

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

* Fear and aggression
* Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
* Uncertainty avoidance
* Need for cognitive closure
* Terror management

"From our perspective, these psychological factors are capable of contributing to the adoption of conservative ideological contents, either independently or in combination," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin.

Assistant Professor Jack Glaser of the University of California, Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy and Visiting Professor Frank Sulloway of UC Berkeley joined lead author, Associate Professor John Jost of Stanford University's Graduate School of Business, and Professor Arie Kruglanski of the University of Maryland at College Park, to analyze the literature on conservatism.

The psychologists sought patterns among 88 samples, involving 22,818 participants, taken from journal articles, books and conference papers. The material originating from 12 countries included speeches and interviews given by politicians, opinions and verdicts rendered by judges, as well as experimental, field and survey studies.


Researchers help define what makes a political conservative

The research study is accurate in mho. I know the far right will deny it since it's from Berkley.

If Holder goes on record and confirms, as we all know, that waterboarding is torture and a war crime, then let the Bush Administration indictments begin. No American is above the law...not even the President...

I agree. I hope the indictments begin. Americans deserve to know the truth, and to have those who promised to uphold the law, held accountable for breaking the law.

Good morning libs!

I like to think of myself as a butch democrat, but some people would argue that princess:
OrlandoMike is one of my heroes (and mixes up a mean drink!)

As for that cafepress, I liked these.. :rotfl:

305470002v1_350x350_Front.jpg


308621969v4_350x350_Front_Color-AshGrey.jpg


And my favorite...
1:rotfl2: :rotfl2:
LOL
 
The research study is accurate in mho. I know the far right will deny it since it's from Berkley.
LOL

Don't worry there are more articles from other sources other than Berkley...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/13/usa.redbox

Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve


A study funded by the US government has concluded that conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in "fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity".

As if that was not enough to get Republican blood boiling, the report's four authors linked Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and the rightwing talkshow host, Rush Limbaugh, arguing they all suffered from the same affliction.

All of them "preached a return to an idealised past and condoned inequality".

Republicans are demanding to know why the psychologists behind the report, Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition, received $1.2m in public funds for their research from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health.

The authors also peer into the psyche of President George Bush, who turns out to be a textbook case. The telltale signs are his preference for moral certainty and frequently expressed dislike of nuance.

"This intolerance of ambiguity can lead people to cling to the familiar, to arrive at premature conclusions, and to impose simplistic cliches and stereotypes," the authors argue in the Psychological Bulletin.

One of the psychologists behind the study, Jack Glaser, said the aversion to shades of grey and the need for "closure" could explain the fact that the Bush administration ignored intelligence that contradicted its beliefs about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

The authors, presumably aware of the outrage they were likely to trigger, added a disclaimer that their study "does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false".
 
Republicans are demanding to know why the psychologists behind the report, Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition, received $1.2m in public funds for their research from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health.
Apparently, these folks think that there are no public monies that go to researchers who end up publishing research that supports their political perspectives. :rolleyes:
 
Apparently, these folks think that there are no public monies that go to researchers who end up publishing research that supports their political perspectives. :rolleyes:

Hmm, maybe if I get bored today I'll try and build a list of politically-motivated government grants.
 
Well, I wasn't even referring, specifically, to "politically-motivated" grants -- there is no evidence presented that proves that this grant was "politically-motivated" so that's a red herring.

What we can say (and I suspect, all agree on) is that this research reached a conclusion that fostered one side of the political equation. And my point is that there are lots of grants that end up with such one-sided results. And that isn't surprising: If research never concluded with a politically one-sided result, then that would prove that all political perspectives are essentially, objectively "wrong". The reality is that most political perspectives (and especially the two major political perspectives in the United States) include "right", "wrong", indifferent, and equivocal aspects.
 
when do you leave for dc?

Monday. Provided this flu I woke up with is only temporary.

Good evening, man in black. How's the Porsche? Are you gearing up for your trip to D.C.?

Judy's good. She's about 1100 miles away from me, in Miami :( Being driven by her 50% owner.

I am gearing up... getting prescriptions filled, and shopping for a warm coast and some gloves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.















Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE














DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Back
Top