July 9, 2014
Are “Traditionalists” different from “Conservatives”?
Identical twin and fraternal twin studies show: Obedience to Traditional Authority*: … “authoritarianism, religiousness and conservatism”, called the “traditional moral values triad”, are “substantially influenced by genetic factors” according to 2 different studies. All three traits reflect “a single, underlying tendency”: “traditionalism.” Traditionalists are defined as “having strict moral standards and child-rearing practices, … valuing conventional propriety and reputation, …opposing rebelliousness and selfish disregard of others, and … valuing religious institutions and practices.”
What is sacrificed-by or lost by these traits(?): ~ Open minded-ness, … flexibility, … tolerance, …acceptance of the others who are different, and … one definition of intelligence: the ability to consider/hold apparently-conflicting or ambiguous views.
If you are not part of that “Traditionalist” gene pool, will you ever be able to understand or really communicate/dialogue with the “Traditionalists” ?
Are “Traditionalists” an irreconcilably alienated segment of Americans? ~ Do genetic predispositions doom “Traditionalists” to irreconcilably alienating themselves from open-minded tolerant individuals?
… What if it’s not … about politics … nor about ideas? …
…. or just another excuse to dis other people’s beliefs?
A wise disabled person observed: “Everyone is disabled. Some people’s disabilities are just more visible.”
Does this say that we should give special treatment and special exceptions to “traditionalists”/”Conservatives”, because they are victims of their genetically predispositioned disabilities?
* * * *
Feel free to copy while giving proper attribution: YucaLandia/Surviving Yucatan.
I’m perpetually dismayed by implacable differences, especially when they are with very reasonable and educated friends. I have a good friend who studied at MIT (math) and has a PhD in statistics. He is deeply conservative. I’m well educated, sometimes terming myself a bleeding-heart libertarian, other times a refusenik communitarian, etc. I’m deeply concerned about justice. My friend, about order. (Goerthe said order must come first. I’m not so sure.)
At any rate, we rarely agree on how to proceed on social issues. He feels “the market” should decide. I contend that large hogs at the feeding trough rarely allow smaller to feed. He argues that gov’t should not be the decider. I, that holders of dollars shouldn’t decide, either. My view is that a community which can’t maintain balance and fairness will topple. Put you’re hardhat on, folks.
Removed you from my RSS Feed today. Your great information about Mexico was welcome but the injection of your unwavering, political bias into every other post portrayed you as yet another angry liberal. Good luck to you…and cheer up. Every day is a gift.
No anger for me – that’s in your imagination.
You project that I must somehow be unhappy, but I laugh, daily and hourly, over the silliness and foolishness.
Similarly, Bruce imagines we write biased politics in “every other post”, but only 2 of the last 10 posts even mention politics or Conservatives or Liberals.
I am neither anti-Conservative nor pro-Liberal: I simply pay attention to the biggest problems of the last 30 years.
I’m a centrist independent, who sees a Conservative right that drove 2 “Wars on Terror” that killed 1.5 million innocents.
Have Bush and/or Conservatives taken responsibility for these 1.5 million dead innocents?
I read about a Conservative right that supports giving more and more “personhood” rights to big corporations, … a Conservative right that started raiding Social Security funds (Reagan’s choice) for $150 billion – $225 billion a year with no plans to ever repay it, … recognizing the effects of Conservative right doctrines driving ever larger tax cuts for the wealthy, till they pay only 14% income taxes, while the rest of us pay 27% – …. not forgetting the $350 billion of fresh new 2014 tax breaks awarded by Boehner and the lobbyist-bought Congress.
Why should ordinary Americans ignore that Conservative Right tax policies have shifted $3 trillion of costs from the rich onto the middle class since Reagan’s “reforms”.
Trickle down has actually been a “giant sucking sound” of $3 Trillion of wealth transferred by govt. fiat from the American middle class up to the wealthy.
Please tell us what any other US parties have done in the last 30 years that caused the deaths of 1.5 million innocents – in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Please tell us what other party’s wars bankrupted the US Treasury, equal to the $5 trillion paid for Conservative’s “democracy” and “nation-building” wars on terror.
Please tell us what any other US parties have done in the last 30 years that shifted $3 trillion from the middle class over into wealthy Americans pockets by having the wealthy pay basically 50% lower tax rates than the middle class?
Please tell us how Bush’s and the Right’s “regulatory reforms” and policies – loosening banking and investing rules – somehow magically did not cause $7 trillion in total economic losses.
I am not anti-Conservative nor pro-Liberal: I simple remain aware of the biggest problems of the last 30 years – and whose policies and efforts caused them.
Where’s the bias?
I simply cite the biggest problems of the last 30 years…
So I think I just read that you are essentially suggesting that anyone who adheres to traditional values, in other words, values that differ from yours, is handicapped and/or un-intelligent… And I think I also just read that said people who hold values that differ from yours are ‘intolerant’ and unable to accept conflicting views. But, of course, YOU are quite tolerant and able to accept conflicting views…?? That entire post is quite possibly the most offensive thing I’ve read in a long time. I am deeply embarrassed to think that anyone who calls themselves ‘liberal’ really thinks like that. There are lots and lots of people in the world who don’t agree with any one of us on lots of different things. It is the absolute opposite of ‘tolerant’ to suggest that everyone who disagrees with our philosophies is somehow scientifically proven to be less than intelligent or genetically ‘disabled’ in some way. Sounds like the same kind of ‘science’ that Mr. Hitler subscribed to. I, too, have removed you from my Feed as I am terribly allergic to narrow-minded political diatribes. Have a nice day.
Did you read the article above, or just react?
Did you read the link for the news report on the 2 different research studies?
Did you read the twin studies research results?
Basically they found that identical twins – raised separately – show that the identical twins who rank high in “traditionalism” (be sure to read the four “traditionalist” qualities below) share that trait at far far higher rates than fraternal twins – at rates predicted by genetic control mechanisms.
The only “offensive thing” is that you have projected many things and imagined many things that are not factually present above.
Really, if you step back, take a deep breath, and re-read the articles – you can find that the scientific evidence simply shows that people who score as “Traditionalists” appear to have genetic roots that cause them to value certain things. Please – re-read what is WRITTEN – not what you imagine:
” Traditionalists are defined as
~ “having strict moral standards and child-rearing practices,
~ … valuing conventional propriety and reputation,
~ … opposing rebelliousness and (opposing) the selfish disregard of others, and
~ … valuing religious institutions and practices.”
How are these things “offensive”… as you and the other poster imagine?
Most civilized people would describe those 4 qualities in the article as being … good.
Is it somehow insulting or offensive to say that part of the population are “genetically hard-wired” to value theses things?
The disabled part that you find offensive comes from a disabled man – with flipper-arms – who professionally studies disabilities – who personally sees that “everyone has disabilities” – some are obvious and others not.
Who is being intolerant when they say they find disabled people or their disabilities “offensive“?
The study authors note that the “traditionalists” also have notable intolerance for things outside their personal norms. Ironically, both complaining posters have expressed profound inabilities to consider new things – especially when they imagine that the new things place them in an unfavorable light.
Who has exhibited intolerant closed-minded behaviors – replacing simple research results with their own nonfactual perceptions – “every other post is political” and “biased” – while this post is the only even-remotely political post out of the last 10 …?
The research authors proposed that due to their strict genetically driven adherence to rigid standards of behavior: “Traditionalists” may be irreconcilably alienated from other Americans…
I guess the complainers negative biased intolerant responses and inabilities to consider new concepts that differ from their personal ideologies, are 2 more data points that confirm the research results?
Can readers find even two examples of how Traditionalists intentionally alienate themselves from others, based on the Traditionalists inabilities to tolerate even reading about other people’s different experiences?
I’ve lunched with Steve a few times. I find him balanced and open-minded, tolerant, incisive – a careful thinker. Perhaps what has offended you is the accuracy of his observations? Truth is neither conservative nor liberal. It is simply factual. As Senator Moynihan (who identified in both camps during his career) once said: nobody is entitled to their own truth.
I don’t like the fact that some lot of these Web Sites like yours, stray from intension the site was created, like, MEXICO INFORMATION ! But I do like the fact that YOUR president, OBAMA, is showing the world that Incompetent Left Wing Progressive Liberalism does NOT work…God save the USA.
~ What have you contributed to this site?
~ What have you done to support “MEXICO INFORMATION” ?
~ What constructive things have you written or researched or even raised as a good issue?
~ What rights or responsibilities do you have here?
When you write: “YOUR president, OBAMA” , you presume incorrectly that I support Obama.
~ I am an American,
~ You seem to be an American (since you write so emotionally about it),
~ Obama is the legally elected president of the USA,
hence – Obama is your president and mine, but that does not mean that either of us agree with his policies.
I am basically anti-FATCA, believe that the ACA is just a foil – created based on insurance company designs (as they pressured Congress to get what they wanted) – I believe that Obama has done many many harmful things. I disagree vehemently with most of his foreign policies. I think his own meeting notes from March 2009 show that he caved-in to Wall Street investment bankers – giving them everything they wanted, when they really deserved orange jumpsuits for their frauds, I believe that the drone strikes (with no due process nor trials) are horrible, and on and on…
Try to stick with reality and facts, and know that you only hurt yourself when you imagine what I believe and when you criticize liberally, while contributing…. nothing You write “God save the USA” – try starting with yourself, to remember the 9th: stop bearing false witness.
Really, I ask that the critics provide even a little evidence of what they have contributed to our past 7 years of research, translating, and other work to provide you good summaries and up-to-date accurate information on “MEXICO INFORMATION“. What have you done?
What constructive efforts or help have you made?
For those who boldly proclaim “God save the USA“, consider the basic list of what we are to be doing:
“‘Lord, when did we see you … hungry …or thirsty …or a stranger (like the Honduran child immigrants) … or naked … or sick …. or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ ”
Those are the things that earn respect, and the things that could “save the USA“.
To the critics, I ask: Who have you ministered to lately?
Tribalism is a pretty potent force: likely another behavior that has been genetically selected for. That essential very old dynamic of identifying “us” vs “them”, meant developing deep trust and deep bonds with another family group (or 2) greatly benefiting group member’s chances of survival, with the side benefit of forming early communities/tribes that continued from grandparents through to their great grandchildren (and so on).
Re ACA: Somehow “health care reform” wound up with almost no reforms of health care (doctors and nurses treating patients), but big fiscal reforms controlled by the insurance agencies.
When the 3’rd leading cause of deaths in the USA is physician and medical system errors: 180,000 – 200,000 a year killed unnecessarily and … 10X(?) more unnecessarily injured, then it’s time for reform.
When many hospitals have 20% or higher secondary bacterial infection rates, making their patients unnecessarily sick, then it’s time for reform.
e.g. Doctors touch a sick patient, they pick up germs, then they almost universally use their pen or tablet to make notes – contaminating the pen/chart or tablet. Then, even if they wash their hands – they transmit those germs over-and-over-and-over – throughout the hospital and to subsequent patients as they touch their pens, ties, clipboards, charts, folders, PDA’s, and tablets.
US Doctors really are not trained in microbiology, nor in toxicology, nor in nutrition, nor in monitoring their systematic errors, nor in identifying or correcting their systematic errors. Unfortunately, US physicians are selected based on their abilities to memorize lots of minutia for taking tests. US physicians are not trained scientists.
continuing with areas needing real US health care reform:
When doctors prescribe $1,000’s of dollars of unnecessary tests per hospitalization, then it’s time for reform.
When doctors prescribe medications based on what commercials have driven a patient to request them,
~ to prescribe medications based on just a 7 minute visit –
~ to prescribe medications based on what the latest drug company salesman bought them a free trip to a conference in Aspen, Vail, or Hawaii – or just a free lunch –
… it’s a system that’s way out of whack…
When doctors demand and get salaries that are 3X-4X higher than other professionals with similar skill sets – including 3X more than professionals with even tougher requirements, (Physicists, chemists, et al) bankrupting the health systems with their $250,000 – $300,000 a year and growing salaries, then it’s time for reform. Physicians in all other countries make salaries similar to their physicist and chemist cohorts – but not America.
The politicians talked about medical reforms, but what we got was financial vehicle reforms – that are on their way to giving health-care insurance to an addition 10 million people – leaving 35 million or so still without coverage.
Still, 10 million people with fresh access to health care is a good start.
Thanks Steve for the good you do on behalf of us all. And for your willingness to bring out all the dirty laundry, regardless. Based on your comments, I’m pretty sure you’ve seen Jonathon Haight’s TED talks but for others, here is an 18 minute primer for the studies mentioned above. It has definitely opened my mind to my own issues as well. It’s not just about the Right, it’s about all of us.
Alan in Baja Sur
Keep your information and your opinions coming……we enjoy your column. BTW, in reference to everyone being disabled, I have always used the phrase “temporarily able-bodied” to refer to those who claim no disabilities.
Thanks, I liked it too.
A German movie maker whose insights and comments I much admire – a man who was profoundly disabled by thalidomide – whose work focuses on the disabled – made the comment that has stuck with me. We all have limits, and have areas where we struggle (compared to others).