Conservatism is a mental disorder

[crockett]

I'm sure it's all Obamas fault, but there yea go,


http://reason.com/archives/2004/10/2...g-conservatism

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

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r...politics.shtml

This is why if you notice, most hard nose conservatives are very angry in their postings. It's a common trend even here on GFy the hardcore right leaning people always have angry posts. It's a mental disorder so we should all treat them with kids gloves I guess.

[J. Falcon]

I agree it's a sickness and especially a lack oof reason.

[clickhappy]

Originally Posted by crockett

I'm sure it's all Obamas fault, but there yea go,

That reminds me of this post about a cake recipe and the comments turn into a big nasty fight where they end up blaming Obama over the temperature of the cake lol.

http://www.fox.com.au/scoopla/trendi...surprise-cake/

[Barry-xlovecam]

Not really, but it can be delusional.

The past may be romanticised but I remember my parents, aunts and uncles telling how great it was to live through the Great Depression and the WW2 era. Of course I lived through the 60's with all of the turmoil, have been through 4 economic recessions, including the last *great recession*

I fail to see the policies of the past I would want to conserve -- so I just don't see the reason in their position.

Moving forward with better values learned from the less than glorious past makes more sense to me ...

[bronco67]

Look at this thing going on in Mississppi with the Tea Party guy losing to the establishment guy in that senate race. When you listen to this guy talk, he sounds like some kind of anarchist. They want to start their own party, but I say let them start their own country, and they can all live off the land and hunt their own food, and stay out of our fucking lives.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Not really, but it can be delusional.

The past may be romanticised but I remember my parents, aunts and uncles telling how great it was to live through the Great Depression and the WW2 era. Of course I lived through the 60's with all of the turmoil, have been through 4 economic recessions, including the last *great recession*

I fail to see the policies of the past I would want to conserve -- so I just don't see the reason in their position.

Moving forward with better values learned from the less than glorious past makes more sense to me ...

What you said fits directly into the disorder.. Fear, Uncertainty and avoidance.

Rather than move forward with better knowledge they are in fear of the unknown and would rather repeat past mistakes than try something new. What is funny is this study was done back in 2004 I think it was and you can look at the actions of the right over the last 10 years and it reads like a book and it's been amplified drastically.

[12clicks]

man, the lengths the unaccomplished will go to feel good about themselves.

[slavdogg]

http://m.newsbusters.org/blogs/rusty...ental-disorder

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

man, the lengths the unaccomplished will go to feel good about themselves.

Lucky for them, Conservatives are paying the taxes that support them.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Lucky for them, Conservatives are paying the taxes that support them.

Being delusional should be included in the list above.....

Red States Take The Most Federal Dollars

[dyna mo]

hah, what a fucking joke. I'm embarrassed to be a Cal alum after sifting through the gibberish in that 2nd link. It's clear the "research" was entirely biased just by looking at the 100% negative conclusions- there is not 1 single positive attribute they culled from the psycho study, all the conclusions were negative characteristics, a statistical impossibility.

And I won't waste my time writing about the silliness of doing a psychological profile on a political party based on media articles.

[dyna mo]

Liberalism is a mental disorder

The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave.

To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship.

Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions.



http://www.libertymind.com/

[crockett]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

man, the lengths the unaccomplished will go to feel good about themselves.

Fear and aggression. Is 12clicks usual symptom as shown here in this example.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Lucky for them, Conservatives are paying the taxes that support them.

A classic example of Dogmatism.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Liberalism is a mental disorder

The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left?s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave.

To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship.

Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone?s material welfare, provide for everyone?s healthcare, protect everyone?s self-esteem, correct everyone?s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions.



http://www.libertymind.com/

A bloggers rambling political agenda is not quite the same as a scientific study of psychology.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

A bloggers rambling political agenda is not quite the same as a scientific study of psychology.

hah, and your knowledge about the merit of an entire political parties' psychology is based on what?

Point being- finger pointing is easy and completey fruitless & psych profiling of the entire group of people that make up a political party is truly fucking stupid wrong.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

hah, what a fucking joke. I'm embarrassed to be a Cal alum after sifting through the gibberish in that 2nd link. It's clear the "research" was entirely biased just by looking at the 100% negative conclusions- there is not 1 single positive attribute they culled from the psycho study, all the conclusions were negative characteristics, a statistical impossibility.

And I won't waste my time writing about the silliness of doing a psychological profile on a political party based on media articles.

'liberalism' was and is created on the collage campus... no where else except maybe on line at welfare office... it's awesome to see these guys getting there little wieners hard just imagining that they are right about EVERYTHING and ANYONE who disagrees is mentally disturbed

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by crockett

A bloggers rambling political agenda is not quite the same as a scientific study of psychology.

no political agenda in collage professors?

[Robbie]

crockett, you must be living like a King! You are so damn rich that you don't have to work anymore. Just make big time trolling posts on GFY! lol

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Being delusional should be included in the list above.....

Red States Take The Most Federal Dollars

There have been entire threads on GFY that proved that was completely debunked. That it included the budgets for military bases AND American Indian reservations.

Wouldn't you say that it's "delusional" to simply keep posting that misinformation and trying to pass it off as reality?

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

A bloggers rambling political agenda is not quite the same as a scientific study of psychology.

if this "scientific study" were truly scientific, then the conclusion that conservatism is a mental disorder should be included in the current DSM (The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) correct? But it is not. Why isn't conservativism listed in the DSM if this scientific study concluded it's a mental disorder?

[Sly]

Originally Posted by Robbie

crockett, you must be living like a King! You are so damn rich that you don't have to work anymore. Just make big time trolling posts on GFY! lol

He and ********** are closet Hummer owners. With shotgun bracket.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Sly

He and ********** are closet Hummer owners. With shotgun bracket.

Hah-hah!

I actually bet he and Mark are pretty cool in real life. They just enjoy trolling the fuck out of GFY with political threads.

[Sly]

Originally Posted by Robbie

Hah-hah!

I actually bet he and Mark are pretty cool in real life. They just enjoy trolling the fuck out of GFY with political threads.

Since we're getting all "scientific," here is the mental breakdown on trolls.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health...ychopathy.html

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Robbie

There have been entire threads on GFY that proved that was completely debunked. That it included the budgets for military bases AND American Indian reservations.

Wouldn't you say that it's "delusional" to simply keep posting that misinformation and trying to pass it off as reality?

Yea, the Wall Street Journal is posting misinformation that has been debunked on GFY.

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by crockett

I'm sure it's all Obamas fault, but there yea go,


http://reason.com/archives/2004/10/2...g-conservatism

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

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r...politics.shtml

This is why if you notice, most hard nose conservatives are very angry in their postings. It's a common trend even here on GFy the hardcore right leaning people always have angry posts. It's a mental disorder so we should all treat them with kids gloves I guess.

hello. i think your a thoughtful dude. but this is by far your most atrocious thread i ever read from you.

so there are angry republicans here but no angry dems? i think you have blinders!

you are aware that colleges are a bastion of liberalism & intolerance correct? Like when numerous commencement speeches get cancelled at colleges this year.

so why would data from berkeley have weight to you but fox news is all BS?

take off your blinders Vendzilla, i mean crockett.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

hah, and your knowledge about the merit of an entire political parties' psychology is based on what?

Point being- finger pointing is easy and completey fruitless & psych profiling of the entire group of people that make up a political party is truly fucking stupid wrong.

I figure I'm about as much of an expert profiling a political group as say right wing talking heads and blow hards are about global warming.

In fact I've offered up more actual proof in this single topic that shows evidence for conservatism being a mental disorder, than the right wing has offered up to support their claims of denial of global warming.

In the words of Charlie Sheen it's called "winning".

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by crockett

This is why if you notice, most hard nose conservatives are very angry in their postings.

I have had the opposite experience for most of my life. Liberals are usually the ones who get angry, shout down their opponents, post vile foul mouthed rants, toss out insults, threaten violence and throw temper tantrums when they don't get their way or someone doesn't agree with them.

Here's a nice liberal, left wing, democrat movement for you:

http://deepgreenresistance.org/en/

^^^^ These people are certifiably insane yet you feel the need to make a post about conservatism being a mental disorder. Pot meet kettle.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

I figure I'm about as much of an expert profiling a political group as say right wing talking heads and blow hards are about global warming.

In fact I've offered up more actual proof in this single topic that shows evidence for conservatism being a mental disorder, than the right wing has offered up to support their claims of denial of global warming.

In the words of Charlie Sheen it's called "winning".

that's what is throwing me off! I thought winning meant curbing pollution not winning the argument. I get it now!!

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by crockett

I figure I'm about as much of an expert profiling a political group as say right wing talking heads and blow hards are about global warming.

In fact I've offered up more actual proof in this single topic that shows evidence for conservatism being a mental disorder, than the right wing has offered up to support their claims of denial of global warming.

In the words of Charlie Sheen it's called "winning".

1 biased source is not proof in any legitimate was my man... think fox news stating that fox news is the very best news report and me quoting that as an evidence... you're really reaching...

I have a questions for you.... why is it so important that you have the correct thoughts on EVERYTHING and we are wrong? you do know that's called bigotry, arrogance and finding self serving sources is called 'justification' right?

why do you feel that you need justification for your opinions ? and actually that's all they are, your opinions.... are you so insecure that you must believe anyone who disagrees with you is mentally ill.. .

[crockett]

Originally Posted by EonBlue

I have had the opposite experience for most of my life. Liberals are usually the ones who get angry, shout down their opponents, post vile foul mouthed rants, toss out insults, threaten violence and throw temper tantrums when they don't get their way or someone doesn't agree with them.

Here's a nice liberal, left wing, democrat movement for you:

http://deepgreenresistance.org/en/

^^^^ These people are certifiably insane yet you feel the need to make a post about conservatism being a mental disorder. Pot meet kettle.

See here is another of the keywords showing the disorder.. ambiguity

You use the word liberal as if it were a noun. Liberal is a descriptive adj not a noun. The proper way to use the term liberal, would like. Jack is very liberal minded and likes to help all people. Calling Jack a "liberal" as a descriptive noun is like saying "Fat" are usually the ones whom get angry,...." It makes no sense at all.

See you guys are showing all the symptoms of this horrible mental disorder.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

that's what is throwing me off! I thought winning meant curbing pollution not winning the argument. I get it now!!

You first have to win the argument, because it's been turned into a political football.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

You first have to win the argument, because it's been turned into a political football.

I wholeheartedly disagree. The argument is a distraction. People don't need to agree on something to change. We're motivated by personal viewpoints based on morals. By making the pollution topic an argument that requires winning, you also require people make complete moral view changes, since political party affiliation is based primarily on morals, not pop psychology. That's not going to happen, so neither will curbing pollution.

[ilnjscb]

Fanaticism of any type is a mental disorder. If you paint anyone as "hated other" simply because they don't agree with you, you are just like any other fanatic, wiling to dehumanize for a set of beliefs you likely don't even understand.

Civilization is the product of working together. The more you find ways to work together with other people, the more civilized you are, and the more benefits everyone reaps.

It seems to be really easy to motivate dumb people to do anything by putting them on teams and giving them things to yell rather than think.

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

man, the lengths the unaccomplished will go to feel good about themselves.

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by crockett

See here is another of the keywords showing the disorder.. ambiguity

You use the word liberal as if it were a noun. Liberal is a descriptive adj not a noun. The proper way to use the term liberal, would like. Jack is very liberal minded and likes to help all people. Calling Jack a "liberal" as a descriptive noun is like saying "Fat" are usually the ones whom get angry,...." It makes no sense at all.

See you guys are showing all the symptoms of this horrible mental disorder.

Okay, then let me use a term you might better understand and won't get your panties all in a twist about - leftist.

You're just another cocksure leftist speaking with condescension and an air of superiority. Leftists always think that they are right and that they are smarter than everyone else.

And by the way:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal

liberal

noun
14.
a person of liberal principles or views, especially in politics or religion.
15.
( often initial capital letter ) a member of a liberal party in politics, especially of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by crockett

I'm sure it's all Obamas fault, but there yea go,


http://reason.com/archives/2004/10/2...g-conservatism

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

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r...politics.shtml

This is why if you notice, most hard nose conservatives are very angry in their postings. It's a common trend even here on GFy the hardcore right leaning people always have angry posts. It's a mental disorder so we should all treat them with kids gloves I guess.

Nice find...

Republicans are on the way out. They are a complete mess and making things worse, not better. Despite the millions they spend and the shitty tactics they pull, they still lose. They're just a bunch of old farts that will be dead and pushed out of the way soon.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by ilnjscb

Fanaticism of any type is a mental disorder. If you paint anyone as "hated other" simply because they don't agree with you, you are just like any other fanatic, wiling to dehumanize for a set of beliefs you likely don't even understand.

Civilization is the product of working together. The more you find ways to work together with other people, the more civilized you are, and the more benefits everyone reaps.

It seems to be really easy to motivate dumb people to do anything by putting them on teams and giving them things to yell rather than think.

I honestly look at the whole political thing the same as religion. I think it's all absurd, I just think one side is a bit more absurd than the other. It doesn't mean I will just give a free pass, but I tend to find them more sensible in most cases. However because I get labeled as a "liberal" due to disagreeing with the absurd postings from some people, I just play it up.

The fact is anyone whom is clinically sane should have both liberal and conservative view points on a range of issues. It's like I support gun ownership, however I also support responsible gun ownership. However because I think people should have to be held responsible as gun owners then that makes me a anti gun conspiracists to the guys on the right.

I also support fiscal responsibility of our govt, but given the choice between republican spending and democratic spending, I see more proof that the Dems are more fiscal responsible than the Republicans. So again because I don't believe the BS line that republicans spend less I'm again a dirty left wing liberal.

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by **********

Nice find...

Republicans are on the way out. They are a complete mess and making things worse, not better. Despite the millions they spend and the shitty tactics they pull, they still lose. They're just a bunch of old farts that will be dead and pushed out of the way soon.

Dead and pushed out of the way leaving....a one party state ruled by a bunch of leftists and people who want us to go back to living in caves? Enjoy your dystopian future.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by EonBlue

Okay, then let me use a term you might better understand and won't get your panties all in a twist about - leftist.

You're just another cocksure leftist speaking with condescension and an air of superiority. Leftists always think that they are right and that they are smarter than everyone else.

And by the way:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal

It's not used as a noun in either of those examples.. It's used as a descriptive noun In the first "liberal" is used to describe "principles" in the second it's used to describe "party". You guys use the word "liberal" on it's own as if it means a "thing" or a"person".

The only correct usage of Liberal as a actual noun in your example is "Liberal a city in Kansas".

So unless you are calling us a city in Kansas you are still wrong. In order to use "liberal" correctly in relation to someone you still have to use a secondary noun, to have proper grammar and to make sense.

Ie you should be saying liberal person, or something like that.. The way you guys use it is as I said like saying "fat" did this..fat did that. Sounds pretty dumb unless some guy is named fat.

Again not trying to be a grammar nazi because I know mine is not perfect, but it just sounds very dumb and makes no sense.

[dyna mo]

Here, I'll use liberals in a sentence for clarification-

Damn liberals.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Yea, the Wall Street Journal is posting misinformation that has been debunked on GFY.

Hey, do your own research. If you can't figure out that spending billions and billions of dollars on military bases is "federal spending" then that's your problem.

If you look at actual WELFARE without defense, contracting, and highway spending involved...then there are no "red" or "blue" states (since you guys seem to still live in that "team sport" fantasyland).

You want the most people on welfare? Try New York.
You want a state with a lot of American Indians living on reservations in abject poverty? Try New Mexico (which was run for the last decade by Democrat Bill Richardson).

All this "blue" and "red" talk is just divisiveness and horseshit that the media makes up and you don't question it.

Use Google. You'll see real quickly how federal spending really works and the difference between that and "welfare".

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Here, I'll use liberals in a sentence for clarification-

Damn liberals.

That's still not good. It would need to be followed up with a noun.

Like.. Damn liberal hippies.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by crockett

That's still not good. It would need to be followed up with a noun.

Like.. Damn liberal hippies.

Let me try it...

Hippies were the REAL liberal minded people. They protested AGAINST the govt. They wanted to be free. Democrats today are not liberal minded. They seek to control the populace and run our lives (just like Republicans do). "Progressive" does NOT equal "Liberal". "Progressive" equals CONTROL.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Robbie

Let me try it...

Hippies were the REAL liberal minded people. They protested AGAINST the govt. They wanted to be free. Democrats today are not liberal minded. They seek to control the populace and run our lives (just like Republicans do). "Progressive" does NOT equal "Liberal". "Progressive" equals CONTROL.

Robbie gets it.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by EonBlue

Dead and pushed out of the way leaving....a one party state ruled by a bunch of leftists and people who want us to go back to living in caves? Enjoy your dystopian future.

No that's not what I meant, and that would never happen anyway.

Most of the republican arguments are based on outdated ideas, but even worse, republicans always want to trust beliefs & religion over science, which is something mostly older people only believe in. Younger people care more about the rights of women, the rights to marry who they want, the environment and the future where as older (republicans) care more about the gold old days, God, and don't really understand or want to understand science, and who are too scared to believe in science or climate change.

[BFT3K]

[Robbie]

I read that if you snort even ONE marijuana you can become addicted right on the spot.

[ilnjscb]

Originally Posted by Robbie

I read that if you snort even ONE marijuana you can become addicted right on the spot.

[mopek1]

I find conservatives generally grumpy and angry too.

People in the middle (center-right/center/center-left) more even headed.

Far left - bitter and angry.