Jump to content

Researchers help define what makes a political conservative


Recommended Posts

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.

Ten meta-analytic calculations performed on the material - which included various types of literature and approaches from different countries and groups - yielded consistent, common threads, Glaser said.

The avoidance of uncertainty, for example, as well as the striving for certainty, are particularly tied to one key dimension of conservative thought - the resistance to change or hanging onto the status quo, they said.

The terror management feature of conservatism can be seen in post-Sept. 11 America, where many people appear to shun and even punish outsiders and those who threaten the status of cherished world views, they wrote.

Concerns with fear and threat, likewise, can be linked to a second key dimension of conservatism - an endorsement of inequality, a view reflected in the Indian caste system, South African apartheid and the conservative, segregationist politics of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-South S.C.).

Disparate conservatives share a resistance to change and acceptance of inequality, the authors said. Hitler, Mussolini, and former President Ronald Reagan were individuals, but all were right-wing conservatives because they preached a return to an idealized past and condoned inequality in some form. Talk host Rush Limbaugh can be described the same way, the authors commented in a published reply to the article.

This research marks the first synthesis of a vast amount of information about conservatism, and the result is an "elegant and unifying explanation" for political conservatism under the rubric of motivated social cognition, said Sulloway. That entails the tendency of people's attitudinal preferences on policy matters to be explained by individual needs based on personality, social interests or existential needs.

The researchers' analytical methods allowed them to determine the effects for each class of factors and revealed "more pluralistic and nuanced understanding of the source of conservatism," Sulloway said.

While most people resist change, Glaser said, liberals appear to have a higher tolerance for change than conservatives do.

As for conservatives' penchant for accepting inequality, he said, one contemporary example is liberals' general endorsement of extending rights and liberties to disadvantaged minorities such as gays and lesbians, compared to conservatives' opposing position.

The researchers said that conservative ideologies, like virtually all belief systems, develop in part because they satisfy some psychological needs, but that "does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false, irrational, or unprincipled."

They also stressed that their findings are not judgmental.

"In many cases, including mass politics, 'liberal' traits may be liabilities, and being intolerant of ambiguity, high on the need for closure, or low in cognitive complexity might be associated with such generally valued characteristics as personal commitment and unwavering loyalty," the researchers wrote.

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 researchers advised.

The latest debate about the possibility that the Bush administration ignored intelligence information that discounted reports of Iraq buying nuclear material from Africa may be linked to the conservative intolerance for ambiguity and or need for closure, said Glaser.

"For a variety of psychological reasons, then, right-wing populism may have more consistent appeal than left-wing populism, especially in times of potential crisis and instability," he said.

Glaser acknowledged that the team's exclusive assessment of the psychological motivations of political conservatism might be viewed as a partisan exercise. However, he said, there is a host of information available about conservatism, but not about liberalism.

The researchers conceded cases of left-wing ideologues, such as Stalin, Khrushchev or Castro, who, once in power, steadfastly resisted change, allegedly in the name of egalitarianism.

Yet, they noted that some of these figures might be considered politically conservative in the context of the systems that they defended. The researchers noted that Stalin, for example, was concerned about defending and preserving the existing Soviet system.

Although they concluded that conservatives are less "integratively complex" than others are, Glaser said, "it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded."

Conservatives don't feel the need to jump through complex, intellectual hoops in order to understand or justify some of their positions, he said. "They are more comfortable seeing and stating things in black and white in ways that would make liberals squirm," Glaser said.

He pointed as an example to a 2001 trip to Italy, where President George W. Bush was asked to explain himself. The Republican president told assembled world leaders, "I know what I believe and I believe what I believe is right." And in 2002, Bush told a British reporter, "Look, my job isn't to nuance."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neocon 101: What do neoconservatives believe? Some basic questions answered

Christian Science Monitor

Global Research, August 7, 2007

"Neocons" believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power - forcefully if necessary - to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.

Most neocons believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 1991 Gulf War, neocons relentlessly advocated Mr. Hussein's ouster.

Most neocons share unwavering support for Israel, which they see as crucial to US military sufficiency in a volatile region. They also see Israel as a key outpost of democracy in a region ruled by despots. Believing that authoritarianism and theocracy have allowed anti-Americanism to flourish in the Middle East, neocons advocate the democratic transformation of the region, starting with Iraq. They also believe the US is unnecessarily hampered by multilateral institutions, which they do not trust to effectively neutralize threats to global security.

What are the roots of neoconservative beliefs?

The original neocons were a small group of mostly Jewish liberal intellectuals who, in the 1960s and 70s, grew disenchanted with what they saw as the American left's social excesses and reluctance to spend adequately on defense. Many of these neocons worked in the 1970s for Democratic Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a staunch anti-communist. By the 1980s, most neocons had become Republicans, finding in President Ronald Reagan an avenue for their aggressive approach of confronting the Soviet Union with bold rhetoric and steep hikes in military spending. After the Soviet Union's fall, the neocons decried what they saw as American complacency. In the 1990s, they warned of the dangers of reducing both America's defense spending and its role in the world.

Unlike their predecessors, most younger neocons never experienced being left of center. They've always been "Reagan" Republicans.

What is the difference between a neoconservative and a conservative?

Liberals first applied the "neo" prefix to their comrades who broke ranks to become more conservative in the 1960s and 70s. The defectors remained more liberal on some domestic policy issues. But foreign policy stands have always defined neoconservatism. Where other conservatives favored detente and containment of the Soviet Union, neocons pushed direct confrontation, which became their raison d'etre during the 1970s and 80s.

Today, both conservatives and neocons favor a robust US military. But most conservatives express greater reservations about military intervention and so-called nation building. Neocons share no such reluctance. The post 9/11-campaigns against regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate that the neocons are not afraid to force regime change and reshape hostile states in the American image. Neocons believe the US must do to whatever it takes to end state-supported terrorism. For most, this means an aggressive push for democracy in the Middle East. Even after 9/11, many other conservatives, particularly in the isolationist wing, view this as an overzealous dream with nightmarish consequences.

How have neoconservatives influenced US foreign policy?

Finding a kindred spirit in President Reagan, neocons greatly influenced US foreign policy in the 1980s.

But in the 1990s, neocon cries failed to spur much action. Outside of Reaganite think tanks and Israel's right-wing Likud Party, their calls for regime change in Iraq were deemed provocative and extremist by the political mainstream. With a few notable exceptions, such as President Bill Clinton's decision to launch isolated strikes at suspected terrorist targets in Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, their talk of preemptive military action was largely dismissed as overkill.

Despite being muted by a president who called for restraint and humility in foreign affairs, neocons used the 1990s to hone their message and craft their blueprint for American power. Their forward thinking and long-time ties to Republican circles helped many neocons win key posts in the Bush administration.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 moved much of the Bush administration closer than ever to neoconservative foreign policy. Only days after 9/11, one of the top neoconservative think tanks in Washington, the Project for a New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Bush calling for regime change in Iraq. Before long, Bush, who campaigned in 2000 against nation building and excessive military intervention overseas, also began calling for regime change in Iraq. In a highly significant nod to neocon influence, Bush chose the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as the venue for a key February 2003 speech in which he declared that a US victory in Iraq "could begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace." AEI - the de facto headquarters for neconservative policy - had been calling for democratization of the Arab world for more than a decade.

What does a neoconservative dream world look like?

Neocons envision a world in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a "benevolent global hegemon." In this capacity, the US would maintain an empire of sorts by helping to create democratic, economically liberal governments in place of "failed states" or oppressive regimes they deem threatening to the US or its interests. In the neocon dream world the entire Middle East would be democratized in the belief that this would eliminate a prime breeding ground for terrorists. This approach, they claim, is not only best for the US; it is best for the world. In their view, the world can only achieve peace through strong US leadership backed with credible force, not weak treaties to be disrespected by tyrants.

Any regime that is outwardly hostile to the US and could pose a threat would be confronted aggressively, not "appeased" or merely contained. The US military would be reconfigured around the world to allow for greater flexibility and quicker deployment to hot spots in the Middle East, as well as Central and Southeast Asia. The US would spend more on defense, particularly for high-tech, precision weaponry that could be used in preemptive strikes. It would work through multilateral institutions such as the United Nations when possible, but must never be constrained from acting in its best interests whenever necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • Tell a friend

    Love கருத்துக்களம்? Tell a friend!
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • சிறப்பான பதிவுகளைத் தேடி எடுத்துத் தருகிறீர்கள் நன்றி பிரியன்..........!  👍
    • ஹிந்தி மொழிக்கு எதிராக‌ போராடி ஆட்சிய‌ பிடித்த‌ திராவிட‌ம் உத‌ய‌நிதியின் ம‌க‌ன் எந்த‌ நாட்டில் ப‌டித்து முடிந்து விட்டு த‌மிழ் நாடு வ‌ந்தார்..................ஏன் உற‌வே புல‌ம்பெய‌ர் நாட்டில் த‌ங்க‌ட‌ பிள்ளைக‌ள் ஆங்கில‌த்தில் க‌தைப்ப‌து பெருமை என்று நினைக்கும் ப‌ல‌ர் இருக்கின‌ம் யாழில் இனி ப‌ழைய‌ திரிக‌ளை தேடி பார்த்தா தெரொயும்...............நான் நினைக்கிறேன் சீமானின் ம‌க‌னுக்கு த‌மிழ் க‌தைக்க‌ தெரியும்.................இப்ப‌ இருக்கும் முத‌ல‌மைச்ச‌ர் ம‌ற்றும் அவ‌ரின் ம‌க‌ன் உத‌ய‌நிதி இவ‌ர்களுக்கு ஒழுங்காய் த‌மிழே வாசிக்க‌ தெரியாது.........ச‌ரி முத‌ல‌மைச்ச‌ர் ஜ‌யாவுக்கு வ‌ய‌தாகி விட்ட‌து ஏதோ த‌டுமாறுகிறார் வாசிக்கும் போது உத‌ய‌நிதி அவ‌ரின் அப்பாவை விட‌ த‌மிழின் ஒழுங்காய் வாசிக்க‌ முடிவ‌தில்லையே உற‌வே...............சீமானின் ம‌க‌ன் மேடை ஏறி த‌மிழில் பேசும் கால‌ம் வ‌ரும் அப்போது விவாதிப்போம் இதை ப‌ற்றி.............என‌து ந‌ண்ப‌ன் கூட‌ அவ‌னின் இர‌ண்டு ம‌க‌ன்க‌ளை காசு க‌ட்டி தான் ப‌டிப்ப‌க்கிறார்............அது சில‌ரின் பெற்றோர் எடுக்கும் முடிவு அதில் நாம் மூக்கை நுழைத்து அவ‌மான‌ ப‌டுவ‌திலும் பார்க்க‌ பேசாம‌ இருக்க‌லாம்............ஒரு முறை த‌மிழ் நாட்டை ஆளும் வாய்ப்பு சீமானுக்கு கிடைச்சா அவ‌ர் சொன்ன‌ எல்லாத்தையும் செய்ய‌ த‌வ‌றினால் விம‌ர்சிக்க‌லாம் ஒரு தொகுதியிலும் இதுவ‌ரை வெல்லாத‌ ஒருவ‌ரை வ‌சை பாடுவ‌து அழ‌க‌ல்ல‌ உற‌வே........................
    • உந்தாள் முந்தியும் ஒருக்கால் கம்பி எண்ணினதெல்லோ? 
    • “அந்த மக்களிடம் அற்ப விலைக்கு வாங்கி, புலம் பெயர் மக்களிடம் அறாவிலைக்கு விற்கும் கந்துவட்டி வகை வியாபாரிகளை” இதனை எந்த அடிப்படையில் கூறுகிறீர்கள்? உதாரணமாக ஓர் பொருளின் சிறீலங்கா v பிரித்தானிய விலையை கூறுங்கள். எனக்கு தெரிந்தவர்களிடம் அதனை விசாரித்து கூறுகிறேன்.  
  • Our picks

    • மனவலி யாத்திரை.....!

      (19.03.03 இக்கதை எழுதப்பட்டது.2001 பொங்கலின் மறுநாள் நிகழ்ந்த ஒரு சம்பவத்தின் நினைவாக பதிவிடப்பட்டது இன்று 7வருடங்கள் கழித்து பதிவிடுகிறேன்)

      அந்த 2001 பொங்கலின் மறுநாள் அவனது குரல்வழி வந்த அந்தச் செய்தி. என் உயிர் நாடிகளை இப்போதும் வலிக்கச் செய்கிறது. அது அவனுக்கும் அவனது அவர்களுக்கும் புதிதில்லைத்தான். அது அவர்களின் இலட்சியத்துக்கு இன்னும் வலுச்சேர்க்கும். ஆனால் என்னால் அழாமல் , அதைப்பற்றி எண்ணாமல் , இனிவரும் வருடங்களில் எந்தப் பொங்கலையும் கொண்டாட முடியாதபடி எனக்குள் அவனது குரலும் அவன் தந்த செய்திகளும் ஒலித்துக் கொண்டேயிருக்கும்.
      • 1 reply
    • பாலியல் சுதந்திரமின்றி பெண்விடுதலை சாத்தியமில்லை - செல்வன்


      Friday, 16 February 2007

      காதலர் தினத்தை வழக்கமான தமது அரசியல் நிலைபாடுகளை பொறுத்து அணுகும் செயலை பல்வேறு தரப்பினரும் உற்சாகமாக செய்து வருகின்றனர்.கிரீட்டிங் கார்டுகளையும், சாக்லடுகளையும் விற்க அமெரிக்க கம்பனிகள் சதி செய்வதாக கூறி காம்ரேடுகள் இதை எதிர்த்து வருகின்றனர்.அமெரிக்க கலாச்சாரத்தை திணிக்க முயற்சி நடப்பதாக கூறி சிவசேனாவினரும் இதை முழுமூச்சில் எதிர்க்கின்றனர். தமிழ்நாட்டில் பாமக ராமதாஸ் இதை கண்டித்து அறிக்கை விட்டுள்ளார். பாகிஸ்தானிலும், அரபுநாடுகளிலும் இதை எதிர்த்து பத்வாக்கள் பிறப்பிக்கப்பட்டு அதை மீறி இளைஞர்கள் இதை கொண்டாடியதாக செய்திகள் வந்துள்ளன.
      • 19 replies
    • எனக்குப் பிடித்த ஒரு சித்தர் பாடல் (எந்தச் சித்தர் என்று மறந்து விட்டேன். கட்டாயம் தேவை என்றால் சொல்லுங்கள் எனது ஓலைச் சுவடிகளை புரட்டிப்பார்த்து பின்னர் அறியத் தருகிறேன்)

      நட்ட கல்லைத் தெய்வம் என்று நாலுபுட்பம் சாத்தியே
      சுற்றி வந்து முணுமுணென்று கூறுமந்த்ரம் ஏனடா
      நட்ட கல்லும் பேசுமோ நாதன் உள்ளிருக்கையில்
      சுட்ட சட்டி தட்டுவம் கறிச்சுவை அறியுமோ?


      பொருள்:
      சூளையில் வைத்துச் சுட்டுச் செய்த மண் பாத்திரத்தில் வைக்கும் கறியின் சுவை எப்படியானது என்று அந்தப் பாத்திரத்துக்கு விளங்குமா? அது போல, எம்முள்ளே எருக்கும் இறைவனை நீ அறியாமல் ஒரு கல்லினுள் கடவுள் இருப்பதாக நம்பி வெறும் கல்லை அராதித்து வழிபடுகிறாய்.
      • 4 replies
    • களத்தில் தற்போது சமயம் சம்ம்பந்தமாக பெரியா கருத்து பரிமாற்றம் நடக்கிறது, அங்கே கருத்தாடு பெரியவர்களே, அறிஞோர்களே உங்களால் இறைவன் இருக்கார் என்று ஆதாரத்துடன் நிரூபிக்க முடியுமா...........? முடிந்தால் நிரூபியூங்கள், நிரூபித்து விட்டு உங்கள் கருத்து மோதலை தொடருங்கள்
      • 37 replies
    • சமூகத்துக்கு பயனுடைய கல்விநிலை எது?

      பேராசிரியர் சோ. சந்திரசேகரன்

      இன்று நாட்டில் உள்ள கல்விமுறையையும் அதற்கு அப்பால் உள்ள கல்வி ஏற்பாடுகளையும் நோக்குமிடத்து, பல்வேறு கல்வி நிலைகளை இனங்காண முடியும். அவையாவன: ஆரம்பக்கல்வி, இடைநிலைக் கல்வி, பல்கலைக்கழகக் கல்வி உள்ளடங்கிய உயர் கல்வி, பாடசாலையில் வழங்கப்படும் (1-11 ஆம் வகுப்பு வரை) பொதுக்கல்வி, தொழில்நுட்பக்கல்வி, வளர்ந்தோர் கல்வி என்பன, இவை தவிர கருத்தாக்க ரீதியாக முறைசாராக் கல்வி, வாழ்க்கை நீடித்த கல்வி, தொடர்கல்வி எனப் பலவற்றை இனங்காண முடியும். இவற்றில் ஆரம்பக்கல்வி, இடைநிலைக்கல்வி, உயர்கல்வி என்னும் கல்வி நிலைகளே முறைசார்ந்த (Formal) கல்வியின் பிரதான நிலைகள் அல்லது கூறுகளாகும்.
      • 5 replies
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.