You keep using "liberal" and "conservative" as psychological traits. This is not stationary.
In the 1970s the prigs were Church Ladies, and liberals were cool. Watch some early Saturday Night Live. Today, the Babylon Bee is more cool than Saturday Night Live or the weeknight talk shows.
It's partly a matter of who is in power. Prigs gravitate to existing power, comics to those out of power.
But there is also the fact that the Democrat Party has morphed into what the Republican Party used to be -- minus the Christianity. Go back to the 1920s, and it was the Republicans who were the coalition of urbane urbanites and oppressed minorities. The first elected nonwhite in the executive branch was Charles Curtis, who was Herbert Hoover's VP. Curtis was part Native American. (Native Americans were granted citizenship under Calvin Coolidge.)
The Democrats had a blue collar foundation up through Hubert Humphrey. Then, the McGovernite coalition of educated New Leftists started gaining control. However, they were an unelectable coalition at the national level, so we got a couple of conservative and semi-conservative Southern Democrats as president (Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.) Barack Obama was the first Northern Democrat since JFK. However, JFK had more in common with Donald Trump than he had with Barack Obama.
Today, the Democrats retain some loyalty of the private sector union leadership, but overall, the Republican Party is the worker's party. The Democrats are the party of billionaires, bureaucrats, civilian government workers, and clients of the welfare system.
Dutton and Emil don’t reinforce Jordan Peterson’s claim that the left is more psychopathic. They state that the left has elevated machiavellianism and narcissism. These are distinct from psychopathy. Dutton does however in fact claim that the far right has elevated psychopathy compared to the left. So the left are higher on two aspects of the triad and the far right on one aspect
Lib sadism is worse in that there is plausible deniability and they always try to cloak it with claims of virtue.
Those who get assaulted after left wing policies release violent lumpenproles are subjected to moral hectoring by liberals. This adds constant psychological insult to physical injury
Conservative sadism is discrete, obvious and thus easy to identify and combat. Their sadism is generally inconsequential.
Conservatives are largely cattle, they can be steered into supporting just about any cause. Trump depolarized abortion just as a smart secular right winger could depolarize IVF and embryo selection.
The left on the other hand is comprised of fanatical egalitarians, who ideology will cause them to oppose embryo selection and other eugenic technological advancements. Libs are in hock to political blacks, a sadistic bunch incapable of introspection.
Republicans are on net better for deepleft positions, and just general quality of life.
People should support political parties based on who on net supports better policies. People should not select ideology as a means of countersignaling gauche conservative proles.
I have an unambiguously EHC familial and professional background. So unlike many of my lib colleagues and friends, I dont experience any status anxiety if I endorse a policy position that MTG happens to agree with
>Liberal empathy targeted only at specific marginal groups., majority and majority adjacent receive no empathy, only skepticism or indifference. Intense empathy directed towards former allows for members of former to mistreat the latter without condemnation from liberals.
Given the harmful effects for the majority groups, intense liberal empathy for abusers and indifference to majority well being is functionally equivalent to sadism towards majority.
>Political-enemy-directed liberal sadism often manifest in the same base and vile way as general conservative sadism. See resistance liberal prison rape jokes directed at trump and associates when under investigation.
You know, I agree with you, but as far as I can tell this is a US blog about US issues. The USA is not the only country in the world, even if a lot of people here think it is, but we are trapped in a two-party oligopoly where you have a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich (to steal from South Park). I'm kind of politically homeless myself, but given the choices we have and the survey data available, this is a pretty natural metric to go by. The vast majority of people aren't going to be able to describe themselves as 'anarcha-feminists', 'state capacity libertarians', or 'Christian integralists' and probably don't even have the idea of the wide range of ideologies out there. At most you might get them to reflect on whether they're an economic or social conservative (or liberal).
Jordan Peterson, who is often right about so many things, is totally wrong about a correlation between liberalism and sadism. The short video clip demonstrates his strong distaste (which I shared) for the liberal political indoctrination of university students. But such indoctrination has nothing to do with sadism. University indoctrinators are not deriving pleasure from causing pain in the students they indoctrinate; they truly believe they are making students better human beings and are unaware of any pain they might be causing.
The claims about a positive empirical relation between the Dark Triad and liberalism from people like Dutton and Lilienfeld are contradicted by other studies showing the opposite relation or no relation at all. In such cases, meta-analysis is needed, and such an analysis shows, on average, no relation between dark traits and political orientation, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692300421X#s0045
If there is a liberal version of sadism, I think it might be in Internet shaming. I have seen different opinions about whether shaming is a form of sadism. Some say that shaming brings the shamer no pleasure and is just a method of social influence, not sadism. Others say that shamers do enjoy attacking with moral outrage those who they believe are in the wrong.
When I think about the differences between my mother's and father's families, I cannot recall any forms of sadism from my mother's liberal family. But my conservative father's family consistently believed in things like corporal punishment, and I am afraid that they enjoyed some forms of brutality.
Higher empathy doesn't seem like it would mean less sadism. Both empathy and sadism can exist at the same time in the same person.
I'd bet they're negatively correlated, but there's obviously a sort of highly empathic, highly sadistic person who's very dangerous.
You keep using "liberal" and "conservative" as psychological traits. This is not stationary.
In the 1970s the prigs were Church Ladies, and liberals were cool. Watch some early Saturday Night Live. Today, the Babylon Bee is more cool than Saturday Night Live or the weeknight talk shows.
It's partly a matter of who is in power. Prigs gravitate to existing power, comics to those out of power.
But there is also the fact that the Democrat Party has morphed into what the Republican Party used to be -- minus the Christianity. Go back to the 1920s, and it was the Republicans who were the coalition of urbane urbanites and oppressed minorities. The first elected nonwhite in the executive branch was Charles Curtis, who was Herbert Hoover's VP. Curtis was part Native American. (Native Americans were granted citizenship under Calvin Coolidge.)
The Democrats had a blue collar foundation up through Hubert Humphrey. Then, the McGovernite coalition of educated New Leftists started gaining control. However, they were an unelectable coalition at the national level, so we got a couple of conservative and semi-conservative Southern Democrats as president (Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.) Barack Obama was the first Northern Democrat since JFK. However, JFK had more in common with Donald Trump than he had with Barack Obama.
Today, the Democrats retain some loyalty of the private sector union leadership, but overall, the Republican Party is the worker's party. The Democrats are the party of billionaires, bureaucrats, civilian government workers, and clients of the welfare system.
Dutton and Emil don’t reinforce Jordan Peterson’s claim that the left is more psychopathic. They state that the left has elevated machiavellianism and narcissism. These are distinct from psychopathy. Dutton does however in fact claim that the far right has elevated psychopathy compared to the left. So the left are higher on two aspects of the triad and the far right on one aspect
Lib sadism is worse in that there is plausible deniability and they always try to cloak it with claims of virtue.
Those who get assaulted after left wing policies release violent lumpenproles are subjected to moral hectoring by liberals. This adds constant psychological insult to physical injury
Conservative sadism is discrete, obvious and thus easy to identify and combat. Their sadism is generally inconsequential.
Conservatives are largely cattle, they can be steered into supporting just about any cause. Trump depolarized abortion just as a smart secular right winger could depolarize IVF and embryo selection.
The left on the other hand is comprised of fanatical egalitarians, who ideology will cause them to oppose embryo selection and other eugenic technological advancements. Libs are in hock to political blacks, a sadistic bunch incapable of introspection.
Republicans are on net better for deepleft positions, and just general quality of life.
People should support political parties based on who on net supports better policies. People should not select ideology as a means of countersignaling gauche conservative proles.
I have an unambiguously EHC familial and professional background. So unlike many of my lib colleagues and friends, I dont experience any status anxiety if I endorse a policy position that MTG happens to agree with
>Further refinement:
>Liberal empathy targeted only at specific marginal groups., majority and majority adjacent receive no empathy, only skepticism or indifference. Intense empathy directed towards former allows for members of former to mistreat the latter without condemnation from liberals.
Given the harmful effects for the majority groups, intense liberal empathy for abusers and indifference to majority well being is functionally equivalent to sadism towards majority.
>Political-enemy-directed liberal sadism often manifest in the same base and vile way as general conservative sadism. See resistance liberal prison rape jokes directed at trump and associates when under investigation.
This Liberals VS Conservatives stinks to US worldviews
You know, I agree with you, but as far as I can tell this is a US blog about US issues. The USA is not the only country in the world, even if a lot of people here think it is, but we are trapped in a two-party oligopoly where you have a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich (to steal from South Park). I'm kind of politically homeless myself, but given the choices we have and the survey data available, this is a pretty natural metric to go by. The vast majority of people aren't going to be able to describe themselves as 'anarcha-feminists', 'state capacity libertarians', or 'Christian integralists' and probably don't even have the idea of the wide range of ideologies out there. At most you might get them to reflect on whether they're an economic or social conservative (or liberal).
Jordan Peterson, who is often right about so many things, is totally wrong about a correlation between liberalism and sadism. The short video clip demonstrates his strong distaste (which I shared) for the liberal political indoctrination of university students. But such indoctrination has nothing to do with sadism. University indoctrinators are not deriving pleasure from causing pain in the students they indoctrinate; they truly believe they are making students better human beings and are unaware of any pain they might be causing.
The claims about a positive empirical relation between the Dark Triad and liberalism from people like Dutton and Lilienfeld are contradicted by other studies showing the opposite relation or no relation at all. In such cases, meta-analysis is needed, and such an analysis shows, on average, no relation between dark traits and political orientation, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692300421X#s0045
If there is a liberal version of sadism, I think it might be in Internet shaming. I have seen different opinions about whether shaming is a form of sadism. Some say that shaming brings the shamer no pleasure and is just a method of social influence, not sadism. Others say that shamers do enjoy attacking with moral outrage those who they believe are in the wrong.
When I think about the differences between my mother's and father's families, I cannot recall any forms of sadism from my mother's liberal family. But my conservative father's family consistently believed in things like corporal punishment, and I am afraid that they enjoyed some forms of brutality.