Liberal "Groupiness" and Fear Projection

Timothy Birdnow

Here is an interesting bit of research. Not anything we didn't already know.

From the article:

In an experiment with 141 people, participants were surveyed on their political affiliations, which identified them as self-declared Democrats or Republicans, or as subjects who leaned more Democrat or Republican in terms of their political beliefs (called Independents, for the purposes of the study).

They also took part in a survey that asked them a number of seemingly neutral questions about their aesthetic preferences in relation to a series of artworks, choosing favourites among similar-looking paintings or different lines of poetry.

After these exercises, the participants took part in tests where they were placed in groups - either based around political affiliations (Democrats or Republicans), or more neutral categorisations reflecting their answers about which artworks they preferred. In a third test, the groups were random.

While in these groups, the participants ran through an income allocation exercise, in which they could choose to allocate various amounts of money to themselves, to fellow group members, or to members of the other group.

The researchers expected to find bias in terms of these income allocations based around political mindsets, with people giving themselves more money, along with people who shared their political persuasion. But they also found something else.

"We compare Democrats with D-Independents and find that party members do show more in-group bias; on average, their choices led to higher income for in-group participants," the authors explain in their study.

Gee; whoda thunk it! Democrats are more partisan than Democrat-leaning independents.

But here is the interesting point:


Which proves the Left blackballs conservatives in other areas of life. You are either with them or against them. It doesn't matter if you are involved in science or waiting tables, they will try to cut you out if they can.

Here is another interesting point:

By contrast, the latter type, non-groupy individuals, don't display this kind of tendency, and are more likely to act the same way, regardless of whether or not they're in a group setting. These non-groupy individuals also seem to make faster decisions than groupy people, the team found.

"We don't know if non-groupy people are faster generally," Kranton says.

"It could be they're making decisions faster because they're not paying attention to whether somebody is in their group or not each time they have to make a decision."

Hmmm.

What this is saying is that there are those who are afraid to act outside of the collective. These individuals cannot make quick decisions because they have to first take into account what others will expect.

We've known this all along, but it's good to have a scientific study confirm it. Liberals are collective in nature. They fear standing on their own. Like herd animals, they seek the protection of the group. It explains why they are so willing to embrace socialism. It explains why they are so eager to find their identity in groups i.e. racial identity, or sexual identity.

I've always argued that liberals are the kids who stayed in their playpens, who never wandered outside alone, who were frightened of solitude. They are, in my opinion, the kids who wanted guardrails on their beds and were afraid to take risks. They internalized their fears into a political position. And they desperately seek to impose that worldview on others because they fear anything outside of their protective cocoon. Snowflakes and safe spaces are a natural end result of this mindset.

So are laws designed to make you safe. The whole Covid 19 overreaction is a prime example.

Notice they made no mention of Democrats v. Republicans in terms of "groupiness'; why do you suppose that is? I am sure comparing the two sides of the political divide would have made the contrast quite stark. They probably feared doing that because they wouldn't get published by "woke" crybaby peer reviewers.

I remember a number of years ago some liberal researchers tried to pin fear and cowardice on Conservatives. That was just projection (and it was rebutted by later research.) This suggests it was pure projection.

I would say conservatives are more realistic and understand dangers better. Why? Because we don't expect to be coddled and protected by someone else. If you are responsible for your own safety and security (and prosperity) you are more cautious about managing risk. Liberals don't bother managing risk, because they expect someone else to do it. Therein is the crux of the difference between us; liberals are emotional children, expecting the tribe/herd to maintain guardrails. Their idea of freedom is to do anything they want and count on others to maintain secure fences to keep them from hurting themselves. Conservatives think freedom is being able to make your own decisions about your life and walk fearlessly without borders. It's a huge psychological difference.

Of course, the Left would never admit this, or put it that way. But it is real and it is why we do not see eye to eye. To put it in terms of wildlife, we are bears and they are wolves. Wolves don't generally take down bears, but they annoy the hell out of them - and steal their food.

Pretty much describes a liberal, doesn't it!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 933 words, total size 7 kb.