Why My Friend "S." Is A Republican

[Curious George]

Actually, PureX, I've noticed the same pattern. While I wouldn't say every rabid conservative had a similar background to your friend, nor say that anyone with a similar background will become a rabid conservative, I have noticed over the years that there seems to be a greater chance that someone who is a rabid conservative suffered childhood abuse than is usually the case.

Indeed, it is well known that people who have been abused as children tend to either go on to be abused as adults or become abusers themselves. Perhaps such people also tend to hold rabidly conservative political an social views - which, if you think about it, are views that frequently amount to justifications for why certain people and certain groups of people "deserve" to be mistreated by society, the government, etc.

Again, while I don't think all conservative politics is rooted in childhood abuse, it seems reasonable that some might very well be.

I have not noticed this pattern. While I acknowledge that our childhood experiences have long lasting effects that shape our identities, I do not think it is fair to attribute abuse with conservatism.

 

[Sunstone]

I have not noticed this pattern. While I acknowledge that our childhood experiences have long lasting effects that shape our identities, I do not think it is fair to attribute abuse with conservatism.

I am not "attributing abuse with conservatism". I was quite specific in saying that I have observed no one to one correlation. But there does seem to me to be a marked tendency for people who hold rabidly conservative views to have been abused as children.

 

[Curious George]

I am not "attributing abuse with conservatism". I was quite specific in saying that I have observed no one to one correlation. But there does seem to me to be a marked tendency for people who hold rabidly conservative views to have been abused as children.

It seemed to me that you were saying that this correlation exists with conservatism more so than with other belief sets, that is attributing abuse with conservatism. This does not seem fair. Suggesting that abuse during childhood causes an increased likelihood of expressing conservatism during adulthood does not make sense. Do we see higher levels of rabid conservatism in the same demographics where we see higher incidences of abuse? If not why, if such a pattern exists?

 

[dfnj]

Republicans are just as bad as Democrats. If you think otherwise you are delusional. The problem is both parties are exactly the same nowadays. Domestic policy for both parties is defined by the lobbyists. And both parties have the same lobbyists. And foreign policy is define by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). There is reason why Trumps foreign policy is exactly the same as Obama's which was exactly the same as Bush's.

The problems with our country are not rocket science. The lobbyists force the politicians to pass legislation creating cartels and monopolies in exchange for campaign financing. The lobbyists own the politicians. The CEOs own the lobbyists. This way once the CEO legislates away the free-market then she can gouge the consumer. The CEOs own this country. Corporations ARE the government.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Benito Mussolini

George Carlin had a really good read on this country. His criticisms are more true today than they were years ago when he was alive doing this bit:

During the Great Depression people were more open to pro-communist type government policies. There was a strong anti laissez-faire capitalist sentiment during the depression. Check out this text from FDR's speech at the 1936 Democrat National Convention:

An old English judge once said: 'Necessitous men are not free men.' Liberty requires opportunity to make a living - a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.

For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor - other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness. Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government."

People were not conditioned by the propaganda to be so anti-government back then. Marx had some very insightful criticism of laissez-faire capitalism and why our lives are so full of misery:

Public opinion is mostly irrelevant. Money talks whoever counts the votes decides the election. Politics are pretty much a waste of time. Just sit back and enjoy being screwed.

Marx said laissez-faire capitalism is always followed by communism because unfettered greed would result in the government's currency collapsing. Once the currency collapses people in the breadlines will DEMAND more government not less. See you in the breadlines comrades!

 

[Sunstone]

Do we see higher levels of rabid conservatism in the same demographics where we see higher incidences of abuse?

I believe so. That's been my experience. But of course, my experience (or anyone's experience) alone is not conclusive evidence of something. Still, it's my experience that people who have suffered childhood abuse tend more often than those who haven't to become what I am calling "rabidly conservative".

 

[dfnj]

[QUOTE="Curious George, post: 5460303, member: 38961"Do we see higher levels of rabid conservatism in the same demographics where we see higher incidences of abuse?

I believe so. That's been my experience. But of course, my experience (or anyone's experience) alone is not conclusive evidence of something. Still, it's my experience that people who have suffered childhood abuse tend more often than those who haven't to become what I am calling "rabidly conservative".[/QUOTE]

I think you may be right. Same thing with the homophobes. It's funny out the people who are most outspoken against homosexuality turn out to be one in the end.

 

[Curious George]

I believe so. That's been my experience. But of course, my experience (or anyone's experience) alone is not conclusive evidence of something. Still, it's my experience that people who have suffered childhood abuse tend more often than those who haven't to become what I am calling "rabidly conservative".

I do not have the same experience then. Nor do I see a higher groupings of rabid conservatism in groupings that reflect populations that show higher incidences of abuse (with the exception of religious affiliation).

 

[suncowiam]

Apparently, conservatives are better looking.

Conservatives really are better looking, research says

Go figure...

 

[dfnj]

I do not have the same experience then. Nor do I see a higher groupings of rabid conservatism in groupings that reflect populations that show higher incidences of abuse (with the exception of religious affiliation).

There is something mentally wrong with a group of people who value the biggest bully in the room should be the one in charge. There's something mentally wrong with a group of people who think they are ALWAYS RIGHT, never wrong, their opinions are facts, and other people's opinions are lies. The wiring in the brain is just not done right.

 

[dfnj]

Apparently, conservatives are better looking.

Conservatives really are better looking, research says

Go figure...

But liberals have much better sex.

 

[Curious George]

There is something mentally wrong with a group of people who value the biggest bully in the room should be the one in charge. There's something mentally wrong with a group of people who think they are ALWAYS RIGHT, never wrong, their opinions are facts, and other people's opinions are lies. The wiring in the brain is just not done right.

How does this relate to my very specific point?

 

[suncowiam]

But liberals have much better sex.

At my age, I can say that is no longer true.

 

[Sunstone]

I do not have the same experience then. Nor do I see a higher groupings of rabid conservatism in groupings that reflect populations that show higher incidences of abuse (with the exception of religious affiliation).

Fair enough.

 

[Sunstone]

But liberals have much better sex.

I've always thought it was amusing that at least some scientific surveys on the subject support your statement. I mean, why?

 

[PureX]

Versus hard line democrats that vote for crazy, liar, pedo, sexist, and racist Democratic candidates who only serve money/power/themselves. Al Franken, Hillary Clinton, Charlie Rangel, Burnie Sanders, Anthony Weiner are just a few examples.

Dems are just as guilty as Repubs in this regard. Confronted daily by the corruption within their own parties and continually turning a blind eye to it, just to point the finger across the isle and blame the other side.

Hypocrites the whole lot!

This is exactly what my friend believes.

 

[YmirGF]

The one thing I noticed about the OP is there doesn't seem to be an shred of compassion. One wonders why they would keep such an odious person in the collection of friends in the first place. Birds of a feather, I suppose.

 

[PureX]

I lean to the left, consistently vote left, live in California but even I know this is generalization.

Your friend has some bad luck. I think he needs a better support system.

Just sayin'.

I think he sees the world exactly as he has experienced it. There was no support system for him. And to his way of thinking, support systems are the product of fools and charlatans. As a victim of abuse, he feels much the same as most abuse victims feel: "I suffered, and no one helped me, so why shouldn't other people suffer, too?"

 

[PureX]

Came here to say this. Also liberal as they come, but the life experience of a single individual doesn't mean one can make a generalization like this. Sorry to hear about the friend. . But using their experience to make a bad argument to generalize the entirely of a political party's members in a negative way is a very bad idea.

The OP can't even prove that there's a real correlation between your friend's life experiences and their politics. Now . . . (Surprise) the same old tired arguments for false equivalency and unsubstatiated generalizations of dems and liberals are now rearing their heads on this thread, the muddier the better.

And OP doesn't have a place to argue from because they started it in the first place.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am posing an argument. I'm not. I am merely sharing an observation. And although I wrote of this one friend, I have noticed a similar trend among several friends that share this same cult-like affiliation with the republican party, regardless of how obviously immoral or incompetent their candidates are. They also share this Darwinian view of humanity, particularly in socio-economic terms.

 

[PureX]

The one thing I noticed about the OP is there doesn't seem to be an shred of compassion. One wonders why they would keep such an odious person in the collection of friends in the first place. Birds of a feather, I suppose.

My friend is not an odious person, though he thinks and behaves despicably, politically. He has a great sense of humor, is generous to his friends, and is an exceptionally honest person. And we have been friends for more than 20 years.

 

[PureX]

I have not noticed this pattern. While I acknowledge that our childhood experiences have long lasting effects that shape our identities, I do not think it is fair to attribute abuse with conservatism.

My friend is not a "conservative". And I was not implying that his view of reality is conservative.

His view of reality is Darwinian. Not conservative. He believes that the rich and powerful have always, and will always, take what they want, and do whatever suits them to the rest of us. Therefor, wherever one is in the socio-economic pecking order, they'd better learn to serve the criminals over them if they don't want to become their next victim.