I think of White nationalist in the West as white knights who believe they are here to save western society. The term white knight is used to describe men who come to the rescue of helpless women, but it is fitting in describing the stance these individuals have taken. In their eyes, white nationalist or more honestly white supremacist, believe they are the only ones who can ensure the survival of western society. Although this group is splintered among themselves based on ideology, of whether or not to consider Jews as second class humans; and lets not forget the other Europeans that they call liberal snowflakes, White nationalist are seeking to establish what they consider to be white privilege.
It is great to live in a country where individuals can share their opinions and debate ideas; however, the idea that if White Supremacist ran western civilization it would be better for minority communities and yes the European liberal community as well is psychotic. Beside the belief that the world would be better for all mankind or at least the western world if these individuals were in control some of their goals are honorable. For instance, the goal to ensure their survival and their history I think should be goals of all of humanity.
The fact that I can agree with their motivation to preserve their history and to ensure their survival does not make me psychotic enough to believe that a society controlled by these individuals is better than a society in which all people had the privilege to compete for their lot in life. Because what these individuals want to create is a society in which they have privileges that others do not have. This is why we all must come to the table and start the dialogue of what western society will become. There is only two options we face. The first is we continue to strive for a society in which each man is worth as much as the other only separated by the good or bad that he does others; or, a world where members of one group dominate all others in society and enjoy privileges which the excluded do not enjoy.
FORTUNE REPORT
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
Saturday, May 6, 2017
Liberty, Justice, and Peace
Liberty
Justice and Peace: Political Psychology and The Structuring of the United
States
William A. Fortune
Virginia Union University
I have adhered to University policy regarding academic
honesty in completing this assignment
Submitted to Dr. M. Orok on behalf of the faculty of the
school of Humanities and Social Sciences and Undergraduate Studies in partial
fulfillment of the degree requirements for the Bachelor of Art in
History/Political Science
Semester Year: 2016
Abstract
Problems
in civilization arise when opposing ideologies seek to direct society. The
reason the promotion of one ideology versus another causes conflict, is because
each strategy require different environmental pressures to support their
ideology. Societies encouragement of one ideology versus the other oppresses
the environmental pressures needed to allow the opposite ideology to succeed; thus,
causing individuals to either conform, or be oppressed by the controlling system.
In the United States a political system of checks and balances was purposely
created to decrease the likelihood of a particular ideology implementing a dictatorial
system. Although the U.S. has protected people from each other, it has only
provided humanity with an ideal notion of how life could be, an ideal which
must be protected and persistently worked towards to keep and improve.
Keywords: Conservatism, Liberalism, Classical
liberalism, r/K-Selection Theory, Political Worldview.
Introduction
Due to the climate in the world of political discourse
today it seems imperative that we revisit, internalize, and embrace the terms
liberty, justice, and peace. The Declaration of Independence which declared the
U.S. independence from Great Britain stated that all men are created equal and
granted natural rights to all men which could not be denied. The notions of
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are the foundation of the American
way of life. The thought of liberty has influenced many changes within the
United States; however, as we know, the Articles of Confederation and the
Constitution of the United States allowed for men to be denied their natural
God given rights. Nevertheless, the concept of liberty burned in the minds and
eyes of those who were not spiritually broken, the same desire the signers of
the Declaration of Independence had expressed. Nat Turner, Fredrick Douglass,
and the Sons of Liberty are excellent examples of people who were advocates of
the concept of liberty and how it flourishes in the minds of individuals.
The
United States is credited with providing the world with a beacon of freedom.
Unfortunately, we could argue that today in some situations there are examples
of how freedoms for a select few have been limited. What caused the change of
direction from the concepts on which the United States of America were founded;
and what keeps us from realizing these concepts? Although the United States has
provided freedom for enslaved Americans of African descent and the rights to
citizens who did not have them, today Americans have become bogged down with
the process of ever justifying the reason for having a specific liberty and why
they should or should not be limited. For instance, there are debates on the
right of gun ownership or whether the government can collect mass data on its
citizens.
To
understand the cause and struggles faced by Americans who were and are denied
liberty we must understand the political psychology of the people. Political
psychology seeks to unveil how attitudes affect decisions, and how the
attitudes were formed (Erisen, p. 10). The major political ideology today are
conservatism and liberalism. Defining the terms conservatism and liberalism
cannot be set to one meaning for they are usually expressed as being a spectrum
of ideas. Liberals and conservatives argue for different positions on most issues
and have deeply divided beliefs (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 9-10); thus, liberals
and conservatives are different by definition.
The
influence conservative and liberal ideologies have on the United States cannot
fully be expressed. However, conservative and liberal ideology undermines the
philosophical foundation of the United States. A foundation founded on the
ideas of classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is the idea that people are
and should be unrestricted rational actors with the ability to pursue their
desire (Lakoff, 2002, p. 19). Competing
ideologies have created an environment in which the dominant ideology gets to
define what morality means, restructuring the world in the image. The
environment which we find ourselves in is one in which will not allow for the
realization that all men are created equal with unalienable rights to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Statement
of the Problem
The two
major political strategies, conservatism and liberalism, is shaping human
biology and psychology, while defining morality within the United States of
America. The intentional pursuit by liberals and conservatives to implement
strategic policies that ensure the development of their strategy versus the
other will lead to the persecution of individuals on the opposing side. These
strategies include ideal beliefs of how to raise children, marriage, and the
way the world should be. Societies intentional pursuit of either ideology will
naturally suppress individuals of the other group.
Purpose
of Study
The
purpose of this research is to use an r/K-selective Theoretical lens to
scrutinize the foundation of liberal and conservative strategy, unveiling their
differences to illustrate how the United States of America is and has been
influenced by conservative and liberal strategist. Both the liberal and
conservative strategist require certain environmental pressures for their
continual existence. r/K-Selective Theory will illustrate the biological
foundation and psychological differences of both liberals and conservatives.
After reveling the environmental pressures that shape the biological structure
of these strategist, we will take a deeper look into how the biological
structure, specifically the brain structure, influences psychological processes
creating strategist designed to operate within a specific type of environment.
Significance
of the Study
The benefit of addressing this research problem allows
for conservatives and liberals in addition to Americans as a whole in the
United States to see the importance of politicians removing their personal
belief out of political policy making. The benefits of removing personal
agendas from political policy and sticking to the philosophical foundation of
the U.S. will allow for America to continue in a prosperous direction. Liberal
and conservative attempts to direct the country in a direction that favors their
strategy will always put pressure on the other strategy, which in response will
cause a coalition to arise to combat the dominance of a particular strategy. In
times of political conflict, the progress of the country is halted to address
the influence of personal agendas. The reason personal agendas halts progress
and deserve to be addressed is because it is an attempt by individuals to gain
control of the coercive power of government.
Theoretical
Perspective
r/K
Selection Theory is a “generalized life-history strategy created by Robert
MacArthur who was an American ecologist and a American biologist Edward
O.Wilson” (Rafferty, 2016). The theory is concerned with the reproductive
strategies formed by two different types of environmental pressures, r-selective
and K-selective pressures (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 19). R-selective
pressures consist of high mortality rates due to random predation and the
presence of abundant resources (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 19). Most importantly
the essential r-selective environmental pressure is the absence of competition (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 19). The presence of competition does not allow for an
r-selective environment, furthermore, all r-selective environmental pressures
promote increasing reproduction rates (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 19).
Environmental pressures such as limited resources and/or the presence of high
mortality due to the lack of resources promote reproduction based on
environmental capacity; and are called K-selective environmental pressures (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 19). The essential component of a K-selective
environment is competition without competition the environment could not be K-
selective (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 19).
Although
humans cannot fully be identified as either r or K selective the varying of r
and K practices among humans make the r/K Selection Theory relevant. The theory
also paints a picture of how the decision to reproduce in either manner can
affect society. The terms r and K are variables created to depict population
change (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 20). The term r represents the
greatest reproductive rate per individual, while K represents the number of
organisms the environment can support (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 20). The
theory suggests populations of species that do not come close to reaching the
environmental carrying capacity will reproduce rapidly to consume the abundance
of resources; and the opposite will occur when the population is close to or
reaches the environmental carrying capacity (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.
23). The reproductive strategy that
places emphasis on reproducing rapidly to exploit resources is labeled as r (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 23). While
the strategy to reproduce based on the carrying capacity of the environment is
labeled K (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 23).
r-strategist
adopt high reproductive strategies to exploit surplus resources, and seek to
create environments which provides excess resources that can be freely consumed
(Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 23). This way of life is maintained by high
unpredictable mortality rates, which maintains the balance between high
reproductive rates and the abundance of resources (Anonymous Conservative,
2012, p. 23). Due to the abundance of resources the need to compete dissipates (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 23). Any individual who seeks to compete for resources
will be at a disadvantage for resources are readily available (Anonymous Conservative,
2012, p. 23). Survival and Success in an
r-selective environment will be based on how well an individual avoid threats
and competition while out reproducing their peers (Anonymous Conservative,
2012, p. 23). The need to out reproduce peers creates initiatives to mate often,
with as many mates as possible, and at the earliest age possible (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, pg. 23).
Waiting
to mate and having few offspring is disadvantageous in an r-selective
environment, because of the high chance of dying at a young age and the
possibility of your peers and their offspring consuming more resources than you
and yours (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 23). Low child investment is also
advantageous in r-selective environments because it increases the opportunity to
receive resources by reducing the time invested in child rearing (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 23). r-strategist avoidance of competition leads to the
lack of group participation and diminishing allegiance to any in-group that may
exist (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 23). The continuance of this practice
is passed on by those born in an r-selective environment, who seek to re-act
the traits of their parents (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 23). r-selected organisms have five instinctual psychological
traits. The r-selected traits are avoidance of competition, the practice of
promiscuity, low-investment child rearing, an early age of sexualization, and the
absence of group loyalty (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 23). Rabbits are a
perfect example of an r-selected species. They are not competitive and flee
from threats. They mate frequently and promiscuously, leaving the mother to
care for their offspring alone (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 23).
On the
other hand, K-selected species are limited to the capacity of their environment
(Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). Organisms born in a K-selected
environment must have the ability to compete. Less competitive organisms are
likely to die off from the lack of ability to obtain resources (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p.25). The pressures from a K-selected environment will
create a different reproductive strategy than that of an r-selected
environment. The reproductive strategy of K-strategic organisms is centered on
producing the fittest specimen as possible (Anonymous Conservative, 2012,
p.25). Reproducing the fittest specimen will increase the offspring ability to
compete and survive (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25).
Finding
a genetically fit mate is also important, and will lead to an increased chance
of passing on one’s genes (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). Once a
genetically fit mate is found a K-strategic organism will act monogamously with
their partner (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). This increases the chance of their offspring
survivability; and allow for K-strategic organisms to invest heavily into their
child's rearing (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). This is important because it promotes two
parenting child rearing allowing them to protect their offspring from a hostile
world, while helping them teach their offspring the skills necessary to survive
(Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). In
a K-selective environment single child rearing serves as a disadvantage. Mating
at a young age is also a disadvantage because it does not allow for the full
maturation of the organism (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). Not being
fully mature means the specimen will not be at its fittest prime, decreasing the
chances of obtaining resources for itself and its offspring. The absence of
resources in a K-selective environment increases the importance of competition,
often leading to an increased importance of being a part of a group and expressing
loyalty to that group (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). The emotional bound of belonging to a group is
not found in r-selected species (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.25). K-strategic
species display five distinctive traits as well. The K-selective traits are a
natural drive to compete, the practice of monogamy, investing heavily in child
rearing, a later age of sexualization, and a presence of loyalty amongst group
members (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 27).
A wolf
is a perfect example of a K-selective species. The wolf exhibits the five
traits of a K-selected organism. But unlike humans the rabbit and the wolf do
not think or have opinions about their actions. Animals act to fulfill an
instinctual drive based on their psychology (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.
27). Viewing humans under this perspective makes more sense if we were to
imagine the conditions of our ancestors. Being born in a world with limitless
untapped resources you can imagine how the r-strategic psychology flourished.
The psychology was maintained by migrating to areas in which more untapped
resources were available (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 27). The K-strategic
psychology must have arisen when humans were required to live and survive in
harsh environments with little access to resources (Anonymous Conservative,
2012, p. 27).
The
chance for individuals among our species to adapt and adopt the ability to
survive in either condition could have arisen as well; and could have simply occurred
from the changing of the seasons (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 27). Like
the political psychological spectrum, the psychologies of r and K in humans exists
on such a spectrum. Later in the essay the case will be made that the r/K
spectrum is actually the foundation of the political psychological spectrum.
The presence of the r/K psychologies can be viewed in humans and other species
as well. If scrutinized one would be able to see the variation of r and K
strategies in the Australian Giant Cuttlefish (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p.
47).
The
male Australian Giant cuttlefish protects and holds access to secure egg
chambers (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 47). The bigger and more spectacular cuttlefish are
more likely to hold the keys to the most secure locations (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 47). Since the males outnumber females they have
instinctually created competitive mating rituals (Anonymous Conservative, 2012,
p. 48). These rituals promote the passing on of the necessary genes to survive
in their condition (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 48). Their competitive
nature is why they are identified as a K-selective organism. From the ability
to camouflage themselves to the size of an individual cuttlefish these genes
are important to their survival (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 48). The
winners of these competitions get the prize, the right to mate (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 48). But the r-strategic male Australian Giant cuttlefish
have found ways to reproduce among their K-selective peers (Anonymous
Conservative, 2012, p. 50). The weaker males reproduce using deceptive
measures. These r-selective males lack the ability to compete for the genes are
not desired, and this is why they adopted alternative measures to reproduce. These
males have gained the ability to retract their tentacles and appear to look as
females, allowing them to slip pass the competing males and impregnate the females
during the mating rituals (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 50). The
Australian Giant cuttlefish is just one example of a species that can be K and
r strategic simultaneously (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, p. 50).
Summary
There are two types of environmental pressures, r and
K-selective pressures. r-selective pressures promote rapid reproduction to
consume excess resources, while K-selective pressure promotes reproduction
based on an environmental carrying capacity. An example of an r-selective
species are rabbits, and an example of a K-selective species is the Wolf. Homo
Sapiens (Human beings) are not either r or K-selective, but exhibit the
strategies of both r and K-selective species. The adoption of both r and
K-strategies can be viewed in other organisms as well, specifically the
Australian Giant Cuttlefish.
Literature
Review
Looking
at the traits of r and K-strategist it is possible to draw comparisons to conservative
and liberal strategist. Furthermore, conservative policies promote K-selective
environmental pressures, while liberal policies support r-selective environmental
pressures. The hypothesis of this research suggests that r-selection is the
foundation of liberal psychology, and that K-selection is the foundation of
conservative psychology. The r/K strategies are just the primitive form of
conservatism and liberalism that appeared in our ancient ancestors, which has
evolved overtime with the advancement of our species. The evolution of psychological
strategies can also apparent in the creation of classical liberalism which
appears to be an adaptation of both strategies which.
Liberal psychology resembles
r-selection. People who follow a liberal psychological line of reasoning
support gun restrictions, negotiation vs. war, high taxes on rich for the
purpose of wealth redistribution, and non-traditional family structures
(Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 16). Liberal psychology like that of
r-selective species is programmed to exploit resources (Anonymous Conservative,
2012, pg. 16). The policies which come from liberal strategist oppose
meritocracy in favor of providing equality. Liberal’s psychology operates from
a point of resources being limitless, and a belief that there are enough
resources to allow all people to live comfortable equal lifestyles; as well as the
presence of shortages in resources stems from the greedy consumption of
individuals (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 37). The redistribution of wealth
that is acquired through a competitive free market leads to the discouragement
of competition. In addition to their belief that resources are limitless or
abundant enough to create an equally comfortable life for all, all of which
discourage competition, is why r-selective strategy is said to be the
foundation of liberalism, or the left of the political psychological spectrum
(Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 37). This
statement is backed by liberal’s tendency to promote policies that decrease
competition; because the absence of competition is the essential ingredient in
creating an r-selective environment.
This
also allows for people to act in a more r-strategic manner. For instance,
before the welfare system was created women would have to choose their mate
wisely. If a woman chose to reproduce with a male who is incapable of providing
resources her and her children would be more likely to live a life of poverty.
The welfare system aimed to correct this from happening, by protecting women
from their bad decisions. This also takes away from a key component of
K-strategy, which is to create incentive to wait till maturity to mate and/or
mating monogamously, because resources now are made available by the government
not an able mature mate.
Conservative
psychology resembles K-selection. People who follow this line of reasoning
favor gun ownership, war, low taxes, traditional heterosexual family structures,
and a free-market merit based society (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 16). Like
K-selection this psychology is programmed to compete for scarce resources.
Conservative psychology like K-selection operates from a belief that resources
are scarce (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 38). Their policies support
meritocracy and the competition for resources. Conservatives foster a deep
underlying belief that people who gain resources do so because of their
ability, and people who do not possess the ability to gain resources should not
aspect to gain them (Anonymous Conservative, 2012, pg. 38). The conservative’s support for competition is
why it is said K-selection is the underpinning of conservative psychology.
Conservative support for free competitive markets which resource is gained by
individuals who have the ability promotes competition, which is essential to
creating a K-selective environment; and is why K-selection is argued to be the
foundation of conservative psychology and the right of the political
psychological spectrum.
Examining
the classical liberal psychology through an r/K Selection theoretical lens it appears
to be a combination of r and K-selection. Understanding classical liberalism is
important; because it allows for the comprehension of how conservatives and
liberals are shaping the United States. Since Classical liberalism is the
philosophical foundation which the country was built. The classical liberal
strategy is also what allowed for liberals and conservatives to cooperate with
each other. This cooperation created by the classical liberal strategy stems
from its support of meritocracy and individual liberty. Liberals tend to
overwhelmingly support individual liberty against “conservative’s demand for a
conformist more socially conservative society” (Anonymous Conservative, 2012,
p.16). While conservatives overwhelmingly support meritocracy against liberal’s
tendency for wealth redistribution and socialism.
Classical
liberal’s understanding of human nature could be argued as the reason they promote
individual rights beyond conservative calls for cultural assimilation.
Classical liberals believe humans are by nature self-seeking, self-interested,
and selfish. This would also explain why r-strategic liberals tend to promote
policies that protect and provide freedom to individuals. But this idea that
humans are self-seeking individuals goes against K-strategic conservatives, who
call for loyalty to a nation or group. This difference between liberal and
conservatives is just one difference that creates a divide between the
psychologies.
Classical liberals would agree with Thomas
Hobbes who believed that people who lived in a natural condition would be in a
constant state of war, and why people who are self-seeking individuals would come
together to form governments (King, 2013). John Locke a classical liberalist believed
in a similar concept instead of war he believed the natural state would be a
state of inconvenience and why individuals agreed to form governments (King,
2013). Both great thinkers attempt to
explain why individuals come together to form groups. This notion of human
nature led classical liberals to specifically argue for the rights of
individuals. According to Dr. King (2013) a professor at Virginia Commonwealth
University classical liberals are concerned with protecting as well as expanding
individual liberty.
Like
K-strategic conservatives, classical liberals support for a merit based free
market society shows how this psychology is influenced by K-selection. Classical
liberal support for a free market merit based society stems from their exposure
to the feudal states of Medieval Europe and its nobility status, where
individuals received power and resources not because of the ability but because
of their status (King, 2013). Support for a merit based society goes against
r-strategic liberal’s belief that resources are limitless, and should be
distributed equally among human beings; but is an example of how classical
liberalism is a combination of r and K strategies. Classical liberalism support
for r and K strategies is what allowed for liberals and conservatives to form
the United States of America.
Summary
r-selection is argued to
be the foundation of liberalism and the left of the political psychological
spectrum, for liberal policies tend to reduce competition in favor of equality.
K-selection on the other hand, is argued to be the foundation of conservatism
and the right of the political psychological spectrum, for conservative
policies promote competition the essential ingredient for an K-selective
environment. The philosophical foundation of the United States is argued to be
based on classical liberal principles, which is a fusion of r and K-strategies,
and allowed for conservatives and liberals to cooperate to form the U.S.
Literature Review
r/K-selective environmental
pressures shape conservative and liberal psychology by influencing the
structure of their brains. The structure of the brain produces the psychologies
present in human beings, and is shaped at an early age (Anonymous Conservative,
2014, p. 97). According to Anonymous conservative (2014), “Dr. Ryota Kanai of
the Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience examined MRIs of conservative and
liberal brains”, and according to Anonymous Conservative (2014), found “two
main structural differences” (p.99) between the political strategist. The
differences found by Dr. Kanai according to Anonymous Conservative (2014), was
“that liberals possess a smaller right amygdala and larger anterior cingulate
cortex than conservatives” (p.99). According to Anonymous conservative (2014),
the amygdala processes emotional responses to perceived perception, such as
threats and fear (101). The amygdala simply attaches positive and negative
emotions to environmental encounters, which is used to recognize similar encounters
in the future (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.101).
According to Anonymous Conservative (2014), “the
significance of this is that the amygdala is a structure designed to help us perceive,
remember, and respond to the realities of our environment” (p.103). The
diminished size of the amygdala in r-strategist comes from the absence as well
as the avoidance of competition and conflict. According to Anonymous
conservative (2014), “the diminished ability to perceive threats is a
neurological correlate of liberalism, and is also consistent with the fact that
conservatism predominates among members of the military” (p.103). K-selective
species would have a well-developed amygdala. This would stem from the
competition present in K-selective environments. According to Anonymous
Conservative (2014), “K-selective species have a well-developed amygdala
because, K-selective environments require the ability to perceive negative
outcomes to survive” (p.103). The size of the amygdala in a species stems from
the environment pressures they face. r-selective environments would produce
smaller amygdala’s because, the need to compete would be absent. In liberals
the amygdala appears smaller than that of conservatives; and would explain why
they seek to avoid conflict and competition. Likewise, conservative’s amygdala development
would allow them to respond to perceived threats in an aggressive way.
Amygdala
development is also associated with other r/K-selective traits. For instance,
“Kluver Bucy Syndrome is a psychological illness in humans produced by
deficient amygdala function” (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p. 106). According
to Anonymous Conservative (2014), this illness is “associated with docility and
hyper-sexuality, demonstrating a linkage between the amygdala and tendencies
towards promiscuity, as well as conflict aversive behavior, such as docility”
(p. 106). Also damage to the amygdala which reduces its function is linked to
reduced child investment (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p. 106). This directly
ties the function of the amygdala to three of the traits associated with
r-selected psychology in humans (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p. 106). The
development of the amygdala is shaped by the pressures of an organism’s
environment.
According
to Anonymous Conservative (2014), “the amygdala is designed to be developed
through the experience of adverse outcomes” (p. 109). K-selective environments
expose organisms to adverse situations as they learn to survive in competitive
environments by avoiding failure (Anonymous conservative, 2014, p.109).
K-selective environments would promote and require the development of the
amygdala to survive (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.109). Likewise, r-selected
environments would produce less adversity, and thus would lead to less
development of the amygdala (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.110). Since
r-selected organisms seek to avoid competition, their amygdala will not be as
developed as K-selected organism to deal with adversity (Anonymous
Conservative, 2014, p.110). The lack of adversity present in r-selective
environments creates fear of competition among r-strategist. This fear creates
psychological motivation, which is recognized by the amygdala, to eliminate
competition in the environment (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p. 110). It is
also important to note that the brain is designed to function in its
environment, and the environment is designed to influence the development of
brain structure (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.110). The effect of having a
less developed amygdala would explain why liberals seek out equality through
government coercion and not through a free market system.
The
second difference noted by Dr. Kanai is liberals larger Anterior Cingulate
Cortex also known as ACC (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.110). According to
Anonymous Conservative (2014), the role of the ACC is to “signal when something
is wrong, or something deserves more attention” (p.110). For example, “the
amygdala identifies a reason to panic, the ACC is the button it pushes which
triggers the panic” (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.110). According to
Anonymous Conservative (2014), “the ACC responds strongly towards physical pain
and the psychological stress of social exclusion” (p.110). “This could explain
the liberals focus on discrimination or their ability to perceive their
in-group” (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.110). The ACC “is also activated by
perceptions of unfairness and envy” (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.111). Like
the amygdala the ACC has a specific purpose.
According
to Anonymous Conservative (2014), “an r-selected individual, growing up within a
competitive, K-selected individual who often experienced such an envious
emotion when out-competed as a child, could explain how the structure would come
to be highly developed in an adult liberal” (p.111). An interesting fact
according to Anonymous Conservative (2014), is that “liberals exhibit a larger
“envy center” within their brains” (p.111). An organism with a small amygdala
and a large ACC “would have a more desperate psychology” (Anonymous
Conservative, 2014, p.111). An individual with this type of psychology would do
whatever is necessary to win honoring no system of morality that stood in their
way (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.111). According to Anonymous Conservative
(2014), “you would have an individual who perceived their group as hostile to
them, felt envious towards other successful members, and who was not
behaviorally constrained by their neurological structure which promotes rule
adherence” (p.111). This information in similar to the research done by John
Jost that showed liberals exhibited a diminish loyalty to their in-group
(Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.111).
According
to Anonymous Conservative (2014), conservative’s larger amygdala allows them to
act on empathetic emotions, while their smaller ACC leads them to feel “less
empathetic sensations of pain” (p.112). “This information is consistent with
the theory, because conservatives primary drive towards altruism will be
specifically-directed loyalty to peers, and not aimless empathy for everyone”
(Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.112). According to Anonymous Conservative
(2014), “liberal’s having a diminished amygdala will cause them to have less
psychological force motivating them to act empathetically” (p.112). “Thus
leading liberals to support higher taxes in principle, yet seek to lower their
own taxes” (Anonymous Conservative, 2014, p.112). These ideas are consistent
with Darwinian strategies that are designed to be selfish (Anonymous
Conservative, 2014, p.112). The research done on the ACC and the amygdala effect
on political psychology are consistent with political behavior. For instance,
according to Anonymous Conservative (2014), liberals, due to their smaller
amygdala participate in less charity; but their larger ACC makes them demand
higher taxes on the rich as means to provide more charity (p.113). This is also
consistent with conservative behavior; their larger amygdala would influence
them to give more charity; but their smaller ACC would influence them to give
to those apart of their in-group. Liberal inability to identify an in-group may
be the reason they do not personally support charity as much as conservatives;
but liberal’s tendency to feel more empathetically is more than likely the
reason they promote equality among all regardless the consequence.
Summary
The major biological difference between conservatives and
liberals is their brain structure. Liberals have a smaller amygdala and a
larger Anterior Cingulate Cortex(ACC) than conservatives. The amygdala
processes environmental encounters such as threats, and stores the data to be
referred to when a similar encounter occurs. The ACC is the button pressed that
prompts an individual’s response to their environment. The underdevelopment of
the amygdala does not allow liberals to be able to perceive and process
environmental experiences as well as conservatives. Likewise, liberal’s ACC
development makes them more susceptible to envy, discrimination, and other
emotional stimulus. The brain structure of liberals also decreases their
psychological motivation for rule adherence, and increases their empathy for
others. Likewise, conservative’s larger right amygdala allows them to process
environmental realities better, and to identify members of their group. Their
smaller ACC, consequently, diminishes their empathy for members outside of their
group.
Literature
Review
The
biological differences of conservative and liberals form one side of the coin.
The other side is their differences in worldview. Worldview is defined as “the
way someone thinks about the world” (www.meriam-webster.com).
According to Lakoff (2002), “Liberals and conservatives have different morals
systems, different models on how to raise children, and have different
assumptions of human nature” (p.337). Their difference in worldview appears in
the policies each group supports. For instance, “conservatives are against
abortion, but do not want to prevent the death of a child, due to inadequate
care, by providing funds to increase parental care” (Lakoff, 2002, p. 25). Also
the conservatives support for capital punishment in the light of the opposition
to abortion is seen as an inconsistency in beliefs to liberals (Lakoff, 2002,
p.25). Liberals call the fallacy in conservatives support for murdering
criminals but denying parents the right to an abortion of their children. These
are not the only inconsistency liberals see in conservative policy. Another
example of this contradictory mess conservatives get into according to liberals
is the conservative’s opposition to welfare for the needy, but their support of
giving government funds to victims of natural disasters (Lakoff, 2002, p. 25).
Conservatives
also see liberal policies as a sham. Conservatives would say that liberals
support for welfare and education for children is inconsistent to their protection
of abortion, which in conservative’s eyes is the sanctioning of child murder
(Lakoff, 2002, p.26). Conservative find liberals attempt to champion child
rights, while also championing the rights of criminals, such as child molesters
another fallacy (Lakoff, 2002, p.26). Their
differences in worldview are bound to promote individuals from each group to
seek political power to correct what they view as political fallacy.
At the
center of both conservative and liberal worldviews are their views of morality
and family life (Lakoff, 2002, p.31). Conservative’s ideal model of family life
is labeled as “The Strict Father Model” by (Lakoff, 2002, p.31). This model has
an underlying conviction that the world is “difficult and dangerous” (Lakoff,
2002, p. 68). The conservative family model is comprised of a “traditional
nuclear family, with the father having primary responsibility for supporting
and protecting the family” (Lakoff, 2002, p. 65). In this model the father is
responsible for setting the rules and teaching his children right and wrong
through a system of rewards and punishments (Lakoff, 2002, p. 66). In this
model the mother cares for the house and children, while upholding the father’s
authority (Lakoff, 2002, 66). This model is believed to teach children
“self-discipline, self-reliance, and respect for legitimate authority” by its
supporters (Lakoff, 2002, p. 66).
The
Strict Father Model requires two parent child rearing (Lakoff, 2002, p. 66). Likewise, two parent child rearing is expected
in K-selective organisms and further links conservatism to K-selection. This
model is designed to produce what conservatives perceive as a mature adult. A
mature adult is a person who is self-disciplined and self-reliant “enough to
make plans, undertake commitments, and carry them out” (Lakoff, 2002, p.69). The
Strict Father Model’s perception of human nature is that people are only
motivated to do what they do not want to do for rewards, and not do the things
they do want to do because of the fear of punishments (Lakoff, 2002, p. 67).
Another interesting note is that K-selective organisms mainly conservative
strategist have a larger amygdala and a smaller ACC which makes them more
likely to adhere to rules. On the other hand, liberal’s smaller amygdala and
larger ACC makes them more likely not to adhere to rules. The Strict Father
Model notion of human nature is used to justify punishing those who violate
rules and rewarding those who follow them, and their assumption that this is
the best way to raise children (Lakoff, 2002, p.67).
Under
this model an individual achieves success by being able and willing to follow
the rules of society (Lakoff, 2002, p. 68). This makes success something
accomplished by being moral, and thus creates competition that is set up
between those who are moral and those who fail to be (Lakoff, 2002, p. 68). According
to Lakoff (2002), competition is important in this model, because it shows who
followed the rules and are morally correct, and thus deserve success (p.68). This
idea of competition leads conservatives to the inclination that “rewards given
to those who have not earned them through competition” an immoral act (lakoff,
2002, p. 68). This is justified by conservatives because they believe such
actions would “remove incentive to become self-disciplined and obedient to
authority” (Lakoff, 2002, p. 68).
If the
Strict Father Model is to work the world must remain competitive even if it is
no need to compete (Lakoff, 2002, p. 69). Any restraint placed on competition
is considered immoral to conservatives (Lakoff, 2002, p.69). According to
Lakoff (2002), the conservative world is a meritocracy with a moral hierarchy
(p.69). In this world the government’s responsibility is to take on the role of
the Strict Father Model providing support and protection for all under its
authority (lakoff, 2002, p.70). This includes the enforcement of a rewards and
punishment system (Lakoff, 2002, p. 70). Like conservatives at the center of
liberal political policy is their beliefs of what is moral, and the ideal
family model.
The
liberal moral system is built around what can be called a Nurturant Parent
Model (Lakoff, 2002, p.108). This model is comprised of “preferably” two
parents, but one is fine, and this model is believed to ‘begun as a woman’s
model” (Lakoff, 2002, p. 108). It is also interesting to note that this model
is designed to work with in a single parenting system, which is in line with
r-selection’s promotion of untraditional family structures. According to Lakoff
(2002), the primary goal of this model is to provide children with a fulfilled
and happy life (p. 109). This model carries the notion that the most important
qualities to teach children are “empathy for others, the capacity for
nurturance, cooperation, and the maintenance of social ties” (Lakoff, 2002,
110).
One similar notion that both the Strict Father and
Nurturant Parent Model have is their belief that their models will be conceded through
their children (Lakoff, 2002, 110). The belief that conservative and liberal
parenting methods will be passed on by their children is the same method r and
K-selective species rely on. The Nurturant Model is built around teaching
children to be self-nurturing and nurturing to others (Lakoff, 2002, p. 110).
This model seeks to teach children through attachments they build with their
parents (Lakoff, 2002, p. 110) and, thus make it essential for parents to
become what they want their children to be (Lakoff, 2002, p. 111). In order for
the Nurturant Parent Model to work “the world must be as nurturing as possible”
(Lakoff, 2002, p. 112). In addition to being nurturing the world must be a
place where those who receive help feel obliged to help others, and a place
that is governed by empathy (Lakoff, 2002, p. 112). In this world cooperation,
not competition is stressed (lakoff, 2002, p. 113). A government in a Nurturant
Parent Modeled world would be responsible for ensuring the world and the people
it governs will be as nurturing as possible, by promoting nurturance, and
cooperation through political policies.
Summary
Liberals and conservatives have a different worldview.
Liberal worldview is centered around a Nurturant Parent Model, which is
responsible for promoting empathy, nurturance, and cooperation in individuals
as a mean of survival. Likewise, conservative worldview is centered around a
Strict Father Model, which is responsible for promoting self-discipline and
self-reliance as a means to survival. Each worldview requires that the world
and society create environments to support their ideology. The world in liberal
societies must be nurturing, and likewise, the world in conservative societies
must be competitive. This difference in worldview will cause both groups to use
the coercive power of the government to create environments that ensure the survival
of the ideology.
Conclusion
Conservatism and
liberalism stems from r and K-selection which is a strategic response to the
environment. Just as wolves and rabbits have a psychological drive to respond
to their environment, humans are driven by psychological behaviors. These
drives stem from the biological environment which can be a range of r and K practices
that are known today by most as conservatism and liberalism. These
psychological behaviors form from two types of environmental pressures. r and K-selective
environmental pressures make American conservative and liberal psychology. The
human biological response to r and K environmental pressures influences their
brain structure, specifically, the amygdala and the anterior cingulate cortex(ACC).
The amygdala interprets and stores data. This data stored in the amygdala is comprised
of ways to respond to environment pressures. The ACC triggers the response to
the environment.
What
happens to the human brain structure in r and K-selective environments? The
amygdala is less developed in r-environments creating difficulty in processing
environmental realities. Also the ACC becomes larger which increases
sensitivity to emotional stimulus. In K-selective environments the amygdala is
better develop for this reason, allowing the individual to be better equipped
to process environmental realities. The ACC in K-selective environment will be
less developed reducing the sensitivity to emotional stimulus. Environmental
pressures are the factors that shape the brain structure and human psychology.
Biological environmental pressures develop more than psychology and brain
structure, but the information provided by this research specifically shows the
cause effect relationship between the biological environment to the brain
structure of conservatives and liberals.
r and K-selective environmental pressures create
organisms designed to specifically deal with the type of environment pressure
they are exposed to. Humans have the unique ability to be able to adapt to
different environments, but are inclined to promote their vision of the world. This
is seen in conservative’s promotion of competition as well as merit based
societies, and liberal’s promotion for cooperation in addition to providing an
equal comfortable lifestyle for all. Conservatives and liberals difference in
worldview stems from the environmental pressures they face and how it develops
the brain structure. The structure of the brain then determines the way
individuals process and interprets information. The liberal brain structure is
less equipped to deal with processing environmental experiences, but more
equipped to respond to emotional stimulus. Additionally, conservative brain
structure allows them to be better equipped to process environmental
experiences while being less equipped to respond to emotional stimulus.
The
liberal’s worldview stems from the biological and psychological development of
r-selective environments. On the contrary, conservative’s worldview stems from
the biological and psychological development of K-selective environmental
pressures. The liberal worldview is centered around what can be defined as a
nurturing parent model; for this reason, a liberal society will promote
empathy, nurturance, and cooperation as a mean to survive; furthermore, a
liberal society would require citizens to have empathy, nurturance, and
cooperation as personal traits to be considered a mature adult. However,
conservative worldview is centered around what can be defined as a strict
parent model; therefore, a conservative society will promote self-discipline
and self-reliance as a mean to survive; for this reason, a conservative society
would require its citizens to be self-disciplined and self-reliant to be
considered a mature adult. In the United States liberal and conservative
worldview has existed since the beginning, in the same way, these strategies
have existed since the beginning of all civilizations.
Moreover,
the United States philosophical foundation promoted both r and K-selective
pressures. Specifically, classical liberalism which supports meritocracy and
individual freedom. This fusion of r and K-selection allowed for liberal and
conservative strategist to coexist initially with very little conflict. The
largest and bloodiest conflict American conservatives and liberals faced was
the Civil War. A war brought about by the government’s failure to provide K-selective
conservatives in the South with the dictatorial power to make the institution
of slavery perpetual. Today conservatives and liberals are closing on conflict
again, consequently, due to liberal’s attempts to provide equality at any cost
necessary, for this reason, meritocracy is declining and is being replaced by a
liberal entitlement system that is upsetting the classical liberal foundation
of the United States, therefore, causing conflict between the strategies. In
short, the r-strategist liberals are attempting to enforce policies which will
lead to a more r-selective environment. In their attempt to create this
nurturing world and government they are seeking dictatorial powers which will
allow them to do so. The push to create a more r-selective environment is
naturally causing K-selective conservatives to form coalitions to maintain a
K-selective environment through any means necessary. This natural occurrence of
conflict between the strategist is halting the progress of the country, in
addition, either way the pendulum swings left or right the opposite side will
unite to restore balance. Unfortunately balance to conservatives and liberals
is accomplished by dominating politically.
Enforcing
policies that will further establish the dominance of either strategy would,
furthermore, divert the country from its uniting principles, for liberal and
conservative satisfaction. The pursuit to establish dominance of either
strategy will fail do to human nature which classical liberals recognized as, self-seeking
that is not to say that we are not caring of others, but caring of that which
is supportive of the individual. To express this truth, picture the recent
terrorist attacks in Belgium or France, that saddened humanity, however, the
parents and relatives of the victims are filled with emotions not experienced
by humanity as a whole. People who have no connection with these victims most
hear the news and after a while continue on with their lives as if nothing ever
happened. The reason liberals and conservatives are trying to achieve political
dominance is to ensure the practice of their strategy. Conservative and
liberals will continue to try to dominate politics in the United States but
will fail for three reasons. First, the influence of classical liberalism which
has, consequently, lead to the creation of a government with a check and
balance system, and could only be taken over by corruption and/or collaboration
between the branches, secondly, because of human nature that is self-seeking,
and third, the ideas of Liberty, justice, and peace that once understood by
individuals will cause them to dissolve any social contract that over burden
their right to such dear concepts.
Recommendations
To deal with the problem of competing political
strategies we must recognize why these political strategists seek the coercive
power of government; furthermore, understanding the foundation and implication
of each of their worldview will unveil the reason these strategists naturally
compete with each other. Likewise, each citizen that votes in the United States
must understand their worldview and the opposing worldview to comprehend the
importance of having a political system that unites strategist from each of the
two major political camps. The most important thing Americans can do is to
unite on the philosophical foundation of the United States that is classical
liberalism, which supports meritocracy and individual liberty, in addition,
revisit, internalize, and embrace the terms liberty, justice and peace.
Bibliography
Anonymous Conservative. The
Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics. Revised Edition. Macclenny,
Florida:, Federalist, 2014.Print
Erisen, Elif. An introduction to Political Psychology for
International Relations Scholars. http://sam.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/elif_erisen.pdf
Lakoff, George. Moral
Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago,
2002. Print
King, S. Eric. In the
Shadow of the Light: critical reflections on the Bittersweet Encounter between
Black Folk and American Liberal Traditions. 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)