10/02/10
Comments:
I'd still like to see DougT explain why conservatives answer more positively those questions on the RWA Scale that indicate one favors -- or at least aren't vehemently opposed to -- laws they believe will lead to a society that is more in keeping with their own social values, in contrast to the way MOTR-thru-left answer them. Saying the questions are chosen in a way that conservatives will of course answer more positively shows exactly what it shows. The questions all have two or more elements, any of which they could use to show their disagreement with by lowering their overall score on it. Simply because they contain an element indicating a belief in Christianity doesn't necessarily also mean one must also believe in the dominion theology espoused by the Christian right. Christianity can be...and is...interpreted by others as "liberation theology". Hence their choice to answer the RWA Scale from a viewpoint more consistent with how MOTR and left-liberals did. And if liberals were as supportive of big and oppressive as described by the TP, then liberal-left atheists and Christians were all free to answer questions mining those attitudes the same way the high- RWAs did as well. But they didn't.
What he doesn't want to acknowledge is that it isn't just Dr. Altemeyer's experiments and research showing the trend that's illuminated in "The Authoritarians", but rather it's what the majority of researchers studying the topic also keep finding. And that is that the sub-group within any given population that seems most willing to join the security apparatus of any dominant regime, also happens to be the one that shares a variety of other traits( like low cognitive complexity, needs for closure, uncertainty avoidance). And it also happens that while the correlation with political conservatism isn't 1-to-1 (as at least one researcher seems to have felt (Wilson) when he wrote that "neither conceptually nor empirically does there appear to be any grounds for distinguishing authoritarianism and conservative personality", it's at least close enough for them to say that there's a correlation there and it's a strong one...and that it doesn't matter whether or not it conflicts with the self-perception many of today's conservatives seem to have of their own motives and goals.
And regardless of what Altemeyer and all the others say on the matter, you and the others add to the evidence by continuing to reiterate all the same beliefs on global-warming, racism, liberalism, socialism, etc. etc.etc., as the ones being promoted by FOX News, Limbaugh, Robertson, or WorldNet Daily ONLY. And you do so while ignoring sources that conflict no matter whether they reflect empirical research or first-hand accounts.
Its a denial of reality achieved by also believing the conservative claim that your own beliefs often conflict with the research data of universities because these have all been infiltrated by liberal liars. Even news media that has corporate heads who by law must please boards who are in turn composed of capitalist - often conservative types who are in charge of hiring the very personalities you now claim to be telling everyone liberal lies. WTF?
So why would they do this? Well..... Apparently they all have nothing better to do with their lives than study and work hard for decades just so they can turn around and lie to you and other Tea Party conservatives.
This must also then mean that the Limbaughs, Sean Hannity's, Becks, etc., have all somehow been blessed with a special kind of genius that...despite it being of a sort that fails to register on any known IQ or aptitude measure (other than RWA and related scales of course) .....that still this special gift they all have somehow imparts to them knowledge of the world above and beyond that which even the world's great scholars and scientists do not have access to!
And despite these professors having actually done research on the very topics that Glenn Beck et al have done zip towards, the Becks are still justified in holding forth on such matters over the airwaves.....the justification coming for no reason other than they are simply good conservatives like themselves.
And you consider this a rational way of approaching the world and its problems, eh?? Wow.
10/02/10
Comments:
Intergenerational mobility...as additional data in response to your Gini index statement.
See...what happens is that pure capitalism concentrates wealth into an aristocracy which has no reason to allow anyone else to accumulate it. Thus it becomes unearnable.
10/02/10
Comments:
Again you ignore the salient points...wealth disparity can be as oppressive as governmental oppression. Show me a non-oppressive theocracy. TEA party supported candidates are OVERWHELMINGLY religious, Beck runs a tent revival and calls it "return honor to america" TEA party MEMBERS are overwhelmingly religious. Frankly if they wanted true fiscal conservatives, and personal responsibility they should have been supporting the Libertarian Party all along. The fact that they didn't says volumes about what they really want.
And you missed the point of the NPR story, the point is that regardless of what they say they want the religious conservatives are in charge of the TEA party, as evidenced by their discomfort with keeping the message narrow.
10/02/10
Comments:
Miguel.
On Gini/income equality. The data point over and over to a pattern of inequality. It can also be stated that over and over we understand that education levels the playing field, and the US education system fails. 30% of the students don't complete high school. Our economy does a poor job of making "poor jobs". We don't create jobs for the least educated. This is problematic, systemic and not sustainable.
It creates poverty. You know America's poor.
The poor in America:
Forty-three percent of all poor households own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio. Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning. Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person. The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.) Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars. Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions. Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception. Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher. Poverty in America means you may be better than the internet moguls of Australia.... http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/08/How-Poor-Are-Americas-Poor-Examining-the-Plague-of-Poverty-in-America
10/02/10
Comments:
Miguel.
You fear what?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130238835
When asked if the Tea Party would back abortion or marriage issues the reply was, sorry, we support limited government, we don't care what you do in your bedroom...
"As long as we stay focused on the fiscal issues, that's the glue that holds us together," she says. "If we start delving into the religious aspect or social aspect, that's when we're going to become divided and when people are going to disagree."
Spooky, scary limited government.
10/02/10
Comments:
RadGuy,
I'll skip around a bit to address your views. First of all, I would like clarification to your statement that I lie. I am curious to which statement of fact have I misrepresented?
I have proposed earlier that the "green" voter environmental bloc probably contains quite a few RWAs, as they are governed by a yet-unproven theory. Do you believe in global warming? Or is it just "climate change"? At which point in the history of the planet do you wish to stop the ecosystem from evolving? Do we want to stop the clock at the year 2010, 2000, 1980, 1900, 1000BC, epoch before that?
You serve the world - financed through your government....
Oh, yes the beneficial Australian government - isn't that the government who forcibly kidnapped the Aborigional people from their families and placed them among the good and proper white Australians. And this took place up until 1970! Of course without a right to freedom, you could be enslaved at any point by the Australian government. Looking after these country cousins?
Syphillis - Yep, we join the ranks of the benevolent Norwegians who carried out similar experiments on un-treated humans.
Phone taps- Yep, now Obama wishes to expand this to all communication - email, internet, text, GPS location data. Governments have an inherent desire to take liberty.
NEIS - Unemployment insurance has been maintained for those seeking for over 100 weeks, compared to your 52. If you want free business consulting, there are many organizations to assist you - SCORE (senior corp of retired executives) is a service I have used and donated resources.
Economics - Australia benefits from a government which is pro-mining. If only we had such a desire...
Infrastructure - The $787 b, ARRA was supposed to promote those shovel-ready jobs... Overall our infrastructure is pretty darn good.
The internet scares the heck out of me - so much so - that the 10 million+ page views I had in 1998 - still makes me shiver...
Sweden - Another monarchy which has no explicit rights for their citizens. Yes a great example for Australia.
Creator - If, and it is a big if, you understand the fact that each word in the Declaration of Independence was chosen for a meaning, then you will quickly understand that the Framers chose the word "creator". What is a creator? Is not humanity created by millions of years of evolution? Do you also deny science? If you really take your time to understand why this document is radical you need to understand that the Framers never discussed god in a religious sense. They framed their dissolution from the King of England by saying they were equal because the "laws of nature" and "nature's god" entitled them to be equal. There is no religion in this document, although you wrongly think there is.
South Park - My walk has not been altered by your f'in me in the a. By many accounts Parker & Stone bring out lots of libertarian views. These are widely accepted by the tea party. I think that South Park influenced my teenagers to become much more libertarian than I am, as observed by my son's support of Ron Paul.
10/02/10
Comments:
As for the Aussie support of the confederates - could it be that we bought a lot of their cotton bonds?
See Niall Ferguson's "The Ascent of Money" if you want more info.
10/02/10
Comments:
PBS irrelevant. Hmm.
The only free to air US news broadcast for us is...
The News Hour with Jim Lehrer - daily 4:30-5:30pm on SBS!
Great show.
Our commercial stations get their US info from CNN, NBC, CBS, usually, no media here takes Foxnews seriously. And for good reason - it is obscene.
I know a hell of a lot more about your country than you know about mine Doug.
Cheers Miguel! Keep that shellac comin'!
10/02/10
Comments:
Dougy, you better not spend too much time here - I hope you have a big enough retirement nest egg. Will your type give two hoots if you don't? I doubt it.
Most Aussies lost heaps of cash (mostly superannuation) from the GFC swindle. It didn't effect me. I don't give cash to swindlers. Means that I might be able to buy some cheap housing in the US.
Gee, I could become your landlord Doug!
10/02/10
Comments:
Some thoughts on the "free" market and what it does.Note the sharp shoulder at the beginning of "The Great Deregulation" The elements of oppression can come from wealth disparity as well as government intervention. People naturally form hierarchical structures, such structures become self perpetuating...the question is do you want to be ruled by those you can vote out or by anonymous Boards of Directors.
10/02/10
Comments:
Doug...You finally put a cogent point out there...although an incomplete one. The idea that large government was used as a tool of oppression by totalitarian regimes. This is absolutely true...however it does not follow that all large governments are oppressive.
I challenge you to find a theocracy that wasn't oppressive. This is what I fear.
10/02/10
Comments:
Glad I got your attention. I voted green in the last election. By saying I serve my country is actually inaccurate. I serve the world. My government helped me start my business, and I am an exporter - all from my garage.
"There is no proof that conservative America has any desire to increase the suppression of freedom, of any people, anywhere in the world"
What did I just hear about Guatemala and syphilis?
What did I hear about phone taps?
That's just off the top of my head.
"We fight and leave. We do not occupy."
That is a matter of interpretation.
Hey, I would like a bill of rights too - so would many Aussies.
Tell me - do you guys have anything like the NEIS programme? Google it with centrelink - the place we go when we are down on our luck.
5% unemployment here - what is it again in the US? Banking regulation in our country saved us.
Sounds like you guys need to get some people working on some infrastructure. You know, the stuff outside your homes?
"So what is the basis for Dr. Altemeyer's opprobrium against the religious and conservative? It is his desire to inflict political change, as he states in the final few paragraphs of his book."
I'm glad we're all on the same page.
Nothing wrong with using scientific evidence to support your case. You should try it Doug - it can be quite convincing.
"Republicans legislating your behavior in the "bedroom"."
Heard of don't ask don't tell policy? What is the Tea Party's standing on this as well as gay marriage?
"The global financial crisis has many "causes". Did anyone put a gun to your head to purchase these credit default swaps? Funny, I guess you were fooled by a lack of education. To further your education,"
Patronising and inaccurate. I don't own a home. Tell that to Europe.
"You support "free-enterprise" but fail to understand that capitalism is free enterprise."
I don't understand how you came to that conclusion - enlighten me.
Free enterprise is not the magic answer to everything. I run a business, I think that I have an idea on capitalism, given that I receive No 1 ranking for my product on Google in my country, and probably page 1 in yours. Without revealing my identity to you, the host of this site can confirm this by telling you what colour my hair is. Look me up Bob, tell me what my ranking is in the US.
Free enterprise would not put affordable internet into remote areas of Australia, but we like to look after our country cousins. Australian conservatives like yourself have thrown everything at sinking our National Broadband Network plan, including a Mexican telco tycoon who provides almost the worst internet quality in the world for Mexico - I might add with no effect except a lot of scoffs.
You see, the internet scares the hell out of people like you. God forbid people having rational debate! Makes really hard work for social dominators. All the RWAs who read end up believing the debate winners. Good for them!
"Is it a goal that you "serve" your country in any capacity?"
Yes absolutely. We throw out bad governments. I see it as my duty to take an interest in what is going on, and criticising serving or opposition politicians is definitely part of that. I don't hold back.
By the way, we have two government funded media outlets, although our SBS has run ads for a while. We have 3 commercial networks, and we can laugh at Foxnews if we have cable TV.
Our ABC has a policy to not promote any particular commercial or political interest. Our commercial stations like yours can not be trusted to provide unbiased reporting - even our ABC which was stacked with conservatives from the Howard era has been questionable of late.
We also have the awesome show "Media Watch", although they are overworked by the amount of garbage that our media present us with.
Aside from PBS, you have no independent media. You guys are manipulated by another Melburnian, you'd better watch out that he doesn't turn on you. He doesn't like socialists, but he doesn't like assholes either, similarly, our former conservative PM Malcom Fraser clearly stated just before the election that he did not support this particular batch of conservatives because they relied on focus groups too much for their policies.
If you don't think that I challenge government, you'd be wrong. I challenge everything. I use my brain and I don't lie like yourself.
Lying on a blog like this identifies you as a social dominator. I challenge you to post without a lie.
"In your minuscule view of the world"
So how come I had to point out Sweden's political inclinations to you?
"The fascists. The Nazis. The communists. What is a common denominator? Anyone. Anyone. The common denominator is a big government, not a small one. And what do you fight for? "
What a marvelous backpedal Doug. The trouble is that because you don't have or watch independent media, you don't see the shenanigans that your wonderful capitalists get up to.
Many African countries have small governments just the way you like it, so thugs can enslave people into practices like mining coltan - a mineral vital for wireless devices. And when you don't like a government, send in the mercenaries.
Don't worry, we see the problems in China and other places.
"You see, as an American, I have "certain unalienable rights" which were given to me, not by a government, but by a creator."
Rights given by the creator? Isn't that what jewish settlers say? Quite a versatile bunch of documents are the Bible. Very handy when you want to discriminate.
Leave religion out of this, there is no place for it. Whatever your religious beliefs, most people think that you are wrong. But I don't begrudge whatever fairy-tails that you wish to believe. You have absolutely no proof of a creator. Which leaves the divine creation of these rights somewhat doubtful.
"These rights can never be taken away"
Oh yes they can.
"someone who gets their information from South Park"
Yes, my posts were 100% South Park informed. *sarcasm off*
You must hate South Park! I LOVE that show!
So what funny shows do Tea Party members produce? I bet you have not a single comedian in your ranks. Or renowned musicians, actors, or anyone with the slightest element of broad based popularity. Typical of a group who I perceive care only of themselves and money.
Thanks anyway for doing some research, I look forward to your next post.
10/02/10
Comments:
Radguy,
Wow, where should I start... Its going to be difficult to have a reasoned conversation with someone who gets their information from South Park, but here goes.
Let's go way, way back, to the start... A discussion on authoritarianism...
The study likely had its roots in trying to explain the fascist rise to power in 1930s Europe. Dr. Altemeyer and company, likely view this as a just fight to rid the world of tyranny. That fight is just and good. There is some conjecture here, as Dr. Altemeyer feels compelled to self-censor his points. He likely understands that his work has diverged from this original goal and now focuses his effort at demonizing a political party with bias.
If we, and I dare say -we must - stop tyrannical regimes what should be the practical application of this endeavor? It is a simple thing to say that the evil republicans are the modern-day fascists, but there is no proof. There is no proof that conservative America has any desire to increase the suppression of freedom, of any people, anywhere in the world.
The desire throughout American history has been to free people from oppression. A great example is the American Civil War. Just after Ft. Sumter was attacked, most northern religious defined this struggle as a defining moment, not for America, but for the world. As Australia supported the Confederate States, the religious Americans fought to free oppressed people. And the fight was just. (I'm glad that Australia was on the losing side.)
Fast-forward through our "war-mongering" - time and time again what do Americans do - they do the just and good thing - they free the oppressed. We fight and leave. We do not occupy. And throughout our history we have been - religious and conservative.
So what is the basis for Dr. Altemeyer's opprobrium against the religious and conservative? It is his desire to inflict political change, as he states in the final few paragraphs of his book.
Let me address your mis-conceptions:
The tea party is fighting for limited government. This will not be reported in your state-run media, as they have a vested interest in furthering government into your life. In the US, liberals cry foul for the Republicans legislating your behavior in the "bedroom". The liberals are content to legislate your behavior in the kitchen, study, living room, in your garage, in your yard, etc. Tea partiers say get the hell out of their home.
The global financial crisis has many "causes". Did anyone put a gun to your head to purchase these credit default swaps? Funny, I guess you were fooled by a lack of education. To further your education, I recommend that you understand the Community Reinvestment Act, Barney Frank, FannieMae, and FreddieMac. Forced capitalism through legislation is statism. And statism is much worse than socialism as a economic model.
You support "free-enterprise" but fail to understand that capitalism is free enterprise.
I love the phrase that your hope is that people "all to have the opportunity to find the way that they can best serve the country." That is hard to comprehend from an American viewpoint. Is it a goal that you "serve" your country in any capacity? This statement is very telling. Your brain-washing that big government is to be served by your effort means that you have submitted to their authority.
As a person of mixed ancestry, I don't feel a need to enslave humans, as my forefathers were enslaved.
I love your proposition that the majority of the enlightened will force their beliefs on the minority. I think that was in the book too...
Media stacking. You slough this off as a matter of fact... The politicans can and are willing to stack your media outlets with cronies. Of course this is the case all around the world - Canada, UK, France, Germany, Japan, North Korea, Vietnam, China - all share the Australians love of state run media. In the US we would be appalled that such a condition existed; our PBS is irrelevant in the political media.
Now let's diverge.
Dr. Altemeyer thinks he could, but somehow can't find the ability to find RWAs anywhere outside the conservatives in America.
Let's examine you.
Dr. Altemeyer defines RWAs as having:
1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in their society; 2) high levels of aggression in the name of their authorities; and 3) a high level of conventionalism. Submission to established authorities: You have stated that your desire is to find ways "that they can best serve the country." High levels of aggression in the name of your authority: Claiming I support slavery and that conservatives aren't welcome in Australia. Australians should avoid the US because they might encounter a rabid tea partier. Conventionalism: Intellectuals are soft lefties. Australians "collectively" dunked the tea. Submission to state-run media. Trying to recreate a conversation with Obama. Are you RWA? In your minuscule view of the world, you can only imagine that the religious Americans are RWA, so this can't be? Again, try to rub two brain cells together and understand that authoritarianism is not local and is not confined to the religious. I contend that there are many, many people who are RWA. Is a militant belief in UFOs or witchcraft or "global warming" any different than a belief in a god? 34% of Australians believe in UFOs and 22% believe in witches. In a world historical context which authoritarians are bad. I contend that the socialists have been bad. The fascists. The Nazis. The communists. What is a common denominator? Anyone. Anyone. The common denominator is a big government, not a small one. And what do you fight for? Australians can't even get a bill of rights for their citizens. So you must fight for government, as the giver or whatever rights they deem allowable. You see, as an American, I have "certain unalienable rights" which were given to me, not by a government, but by a creator. These rights can never be taken away. So while you hope that if you give enough to the state, that the state will give you something back - I don't worry about an implied social contract to be a slave to my government.
10/01/10
Comments:
Anyone seen the "Get Served" South Park episode?
Here Dougy, Dougy, Dougy, Dougy, Dougy.
Come on, let's play!
10/01/10
Comments:
"The Social Democratic Party's position is in theoretical base within Marxist revisionism. Its party program interchangeably calls their ideology democratic socialism, or social democracy."
These guys have basically run Sweden for most of the 20th century. 2006 saw them swing a bit to the right. I don't think that a totalitarian state would have allowed this.
Beyond your borders Doug is a world that is very tired of Amrericans like you. You fail to research your ideas, and insist on dominating people. Taste your own medicine buddy.
The whole of scandinavia is basically soft left, and are often described as welfare states.
You are so wrong.
|