Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

« La Raza wants their quid pro quo | Main | Top Headline Comments: 11/16/08 (genghis) »
November 16, 2008

Why, Oh Why Do They Hate Us? (D91)

In 2004, we might have said John Kerry would make a terrible president and his plans would set the nation back 30 years. Rather than evil, we would have called him misguided. He thought he was doing the right thing. His heart was in the right place, even if his policies were wrong. His beliefs were honestly held.

On the other hand, a not insignificant number of liberals thought Bush was evil and should be tried for war crimes. How can some liberals hold such visceral and vitriolic hatred for us and our beliefs? In a 2007 paper, Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham, a couple of social justice researchers, managed to come up with an explanation. Brace yourselves: it turns out that our beliefs are immoral.

Well, at least as far as liberals are concerned. These researchers determined that "there are five psychological foundations of morality, which we label as harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity." Conservative morality is based on some combination of all five of these moral foundations. There may not be an exact 20% input from each one, but they are all present. Liberal morality is based on only the harm/care and fairness/reciprocity foundations.

"Conservatives have many moral concerns that liberals simply do not recognize as moral concerns... liberals often find it hard to understand why so many of their fellow citizens do not rally around the cause of social justice, and why many Western nations have elected conservative governments in recent years."

Liberals are only concerned about harm/care and fairness/reciprocity. When we talk about patriotism, or respect for the country, or abortion, we are speaking from a set of morals and values that liberals simply do not see as being moral at all. In fact, liberals often believe that we have "non-moral motivations—such as selfishness, existential fear, or blind prejudice."

In 2004, "political liberals in the United States were shocked, outraged, and unable to understand how 'moral values' drove people to vote for a man who, as they saw it, tricked America into an unwinnable war, cut taxes for the rich and benefits for the poor, and seemed to have a personal animosity toward mother nature." They couldn't understand it because unlike conservatives, liberals don't believe that ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity are actual moral foundations.

Take abortion. For conservatives, abortion is mainly a religious issue, and relates to the purity/sanctity moral foundation. For liberals, purity/sanctity is not a moral foundation. Instead, they may argue that from the fairness/reciprocity moral foundation, having an abortion allows the mother to avoid the unfairness of being burdened with a child she doesn't want. For liberals, those who are pro-life have no moral foundation to stand on, and the pro-lifers are attacking a very moral position. No wonder they think we're evil.

Patriotism? Forget it. There's no moral foundation to ingroup/loyalty as far as liberals are concerned.

Want to make a movie mocking a sitting president, or write a book about assassinating him? Who cares? Believing in authority and having respect for tradition is so old-fashioned, and not moral at all. If you're a liberal.

Gay marriage? "Conservatives and many moderates are opposed to gay marriage in part due to moral intuitions related to ingroup, authority, and purity, and these concerns should be addressed, rather than dismissed contemptuously."

I think they have a point. I voted against prop 8 in California (for gay marriage), but after seeing how the protesters have behaved since the election, if another proposition comes up next time around, I might vote the other way. When the behaviors of gays are behind closed doors, or even when openly displayed in public, at least ignored and hushed up by the media, it's very easy for me to tell myself that gay marriage is a harmless little thing and no big deal. But when the public face of gay rights is this protest movement, well, completely apart from gayness, I have a hard time feeling like these are the sorts of people I want to support, and this is definitely not the sort of behavior I want to reward and encourage with my vote.

The authors argue that liberals have a huge blind spot when it comes to analyzing conservative motivations. This blind spot limits their ability to reach out to us and convince at least some of us to agree with and vote for some of their ideas. They ask: "Will moral appeals for liberal causes that press emotional buttons related to ingroup, authority, and purity persuade political moderates, who make up most of the electorate, where more traditional liberal appeals have failed?" Sounds like the sort of idea you'd hear at a marketing seminar on how to be a better salesman. If nothing else, we definitely got outsold in this last election.

Obama's success may or may not have been aided by pushing the emotional buttons of moderates and conservatives, but when people perceive the Democrat nominee as the tax cutter in a presidential race, that has to be a wake-up call for us. Cutting taxes is our issue, and he got votes for it.

Going forward, we need to figure out what we stand for and what we believe in, and we need to figure out how to communicate our beliefs to the electorate. We bailed on both counts in this last election. Haidt and Graham wrote a paper claiming that understanding how conservatives think will help liberals advocate positions and win elections.

The reverse may also be true. If we want liberals to accept and even vote for some of our ideas, maybe we need to get better at expressing how our ideas fit in with their two moral foundations of harm/care and fairness/reciprocity.

digg this
posted by xgenghisx at 09:01 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
JQ: "Maybe it would be a good thing, if everyone's pron ..."

Days of wasted Miklosian Youth: "Posted by: JQ Hi JQ! *Miklos may have hit th ..."

Wolfus Aurelius, Dreaming of Elsewhere [/i] [/b]: "Morning, fellow insomaniacals, F. Joke is missi ..."

JQ: "Hell, IDK how commie stuff works. Guess I'll be le ..."

Biden's Dog sniffs a whole lotta malarkey, : "[i]So listen very carefully Get closer now and yo ..."

JQ: "And? Posted by: Miklos is an alumnus of the karl ..."

Miklos is an alumnus of the karl Mrx University of Economic Sciences : " Hmm. IDK... Dontcha hafta be a General Secretary ..."

javems: "According to this source, it's believed Biden had ..."

Miklos suspects: "I bet if Trump said loudly "I will pardon all J6er ..."

JQ: "If they can have "Czars", can I be a Minister Plen ..."

Biden's Dog sniffs a whole lotta malarkey, : "I just want to fire people and cut their pensions. ..."

Biden's Dog sniffs a whole lotta malarkey, : "Crooks had a transmitter. Shady as hell": https ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64