Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No one is immune, but in shear numbers the right is the clear winner.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why is the Right Wing Anti-Science?
- Thread starter Secret Chief
- Start date
I only know about the USA in which there is a strong two party tendency due to the types of elections we run here. Fiscal conservatives managed in the 70's to attract the religious right. The r.right was a new political force which arose with television. Fiscal conservatives then adopted anti science rhetoric to retain these filler votes as well as to keep from disrupting industries and the associated jobs, money and votes. The entire strategy is not, however, to kill science. It is fiscal conservative policy...or so people are told. Obviously the message and the manna can differ.
Now I am not very knowledgeable, and I can't say much about the parties before the 70's. I understand that the two sides have always been at one anothers throats in accusations and in rhetoric and lies. This is nothing new.
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Part of this time I think, taught by media
People tend to go outward easily
Introspection is too hard, pointing is easy
I suspect a great part of the right wing motive for disinformation is to create and enable an "us versus them" mentality. The far right is almost completely contrary to fact, science, and reason. Look at the issues from creationism, to climate change denial, to anti-vax, to political corruption, to anti-democracy attitudes. They also vilify socialism, and then try to pin the label "socialism" onto the democrats, and it's not true in any way. It all seems as if the republicans treat their voters as cult members.
I think a lot of the gaslighting that republicans impose on their voters is exploiting the same behavioral patterns of them denying evolution for creationism. If these citizens are fooled by one idea, they can be fooled by others.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
It still tilts more towards the Right. Such as, even those who believe in crystal energies, Reiki, and other such things will still generally people to go to a doctor and get real medical attention.
The Right has been filling morgues and crematories. The think the Bible is Science. And a lot of them are sex illiterate.
I am really reluctant to answer the OP in this thread. It's always too easy to generalize, to put "all of those types of people" into the same basket. And we do it all the time.
Still, something that I find the more I've studied politics and political thinking is that it seems true to me that those on the right are often uncomfortable with change. "The good old days," they'll say (but were they ever really good?) "This is how it was in my day, and ain't no reason to change it!"
Change is uncomfortable for humans, generally, and I suspect the only humans who really, really like it are wet babies. But change is also inevitable. And probably the biggest driver of change is science. We learn new things, we use those new things. Once, mother had to stay home and clean the floors all day, now we have Roomba.
So people who are, in general, not open to new ideas, to new facts, to new ways of understand our world -- even ourselves -- are going to find science threatening.
And, to be perfectly honest, that is something that seems to be almost a trope here on RF.
Still, something that I find the more I've studied politics and political thinking is that it seems true to me that those on the right are often uncomfortable with change. "The good old days," they'll say (but were they ever really good?) "This is how it was in my day, and ain't no reason to change it!"
Change is uncomfortable for humans, generally, and I suspect the only humans who really, really like it are wet babies. But change is also inevitable. And probably the biggest driver of change is science. We learn new things, we use those new things. Once, mother had to stay home and clean the floors all day, now we have Roomba.
So people who are, in general, not open to new ideas, to new facts, to new ways of understand our world -- even ourselves -- are going to find science threatening.
And, to be perfectly honest, that is something that seems to be almost a trope here on RF.
I never really thought it was very accurate to say the right-wing is "anti-science."
After all, when it comes to weapons making and development, they're very much pro-science.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
A childish misrepresentation/strawman.
Only in backwater America and the Islamic third world.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Actually that's not true. 33 percent of Americans don't believe in evolution, at least as it is taught. And many are highly intelligent people. Many traditional Jews also reject it.
Audie
Veteran Member
Then too, some on right n left have no conscience about scurrilous stereotyping
Audie
Veteran Member
" as its taught".
Its an easy obvious concept but-
Sure. It gets brief mention in school, while in
Church its denounced with more lies
than lucifer can think of.
Even intelligent people can be conned.
And by those numbers, a lot are.
Last edited:
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
This is the backwater America I speak of. Those who reject science because it conflicts with the superstitious beliefs they were indoctrinated into as children.
One can still be intelligent and yet also willfully ignorant/intellectually dishonest.
Because it conflicts with their hocus pocus, logic and evidence be damned.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
When you say science didn't exist first natural humans did. How many intelligent humans can think for themselves today. As scientists just humans first are by intent liars.
Instead men with machine possessed minds say humans as aliens were created inside a machine. I will theory said machine I conjured destroyed. I will pretend I created the alien human inside my copying machine then converted the human once an alien into electricity.
As a human is part machine hence I must plug them into electricity as the machine. By my choices man science community about God.
Instead asking why do you say a human is part a machine by thought only first?
Real answer as human image voice was machine caused so a human now is a machine status plus natural living life now co exist. My mind human got told.
Is why you argue.... is a human allowed to just be a human by human science terms.
Instead men with machine possessed minds say humans as aliens were created inside a machine. I will theory said machine I conjured destroyed. I will pretend I created the alien human inside my copying machine then converted the human once an alien into electricity.
As a human is part machine hence I must plug them into electricity as the machine. By my choices man science community about God.
Instead asking why do you say a human is part a machine by thought only first?
Real answer as human image voice was machine caused so a human now is a machine status plus natural living life now co exist. My mind human got told.
Is why you argue.... is a human allowed to just be a human by human science terms.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
I still say we should just let them have the South and MidWest. Just let them have it, do it all their way, they run the show, the just have to leave the rest of us alone.
Heyo
Veteran Member
That's basically a tautology. You can't be a hypocrite and consistent at the same time.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Still, to label their views as "anti-science" might be missing the mark a bit. It may sound good, and some may see it as a useful political label to make the right-wing look bad. I'm just not sure how effective it is in changing anyone's mind. If anything, the tactics of ridicule and mockery (which have been in play for more than 30 years now) have shown to have the opposite effect. I think it might be time to consider other strategies.
The Left has generally been anti-technology. GMO foods, AI, automation, computers etc. In general conservation is good. But you cannot go back to the stone age.
Example of what happens when idiotic ideas are implemented wholesale,
Sri Lanka’s Plunge Into Organic Farming Brings Disaster