I can't for the life of me figure out how 'conservatives' have convinced working people

[Fuzz]

to continue to vote against their own interests year after year. Instead of seeing benefits union members may get as something every working person in this country deserves, they would rather take it away from people because 'I don't have it, why should they'.

Instead of being angry at the Wall Street banks who gambled and lost their 401k and pension (if they even had one) money and then bailed out with our tax money, the conservatives have convinced them that their neighbors and kid's teachers are the ones who are stealing all the money.

How the hell? Honestly I don't get it.

[Historic NY]

1. Sometimes you just can't fix stupid.

[pintobean]

39. Working people are stupid?

[Bandit]

45. Apparently Republican working people are..

What other logical explanation can there be for people that consistantly vote against their own interests and in fact their country..

[pbrower2a]

54. Fear!

Remember that people who work in non-union factories and stores get much propaganda from their bosses and the business owners. The collection of anti-liberal smears simply accumulates -- liberals want to raise taxes that will put this company out of business, union "bosses" will be worse than the economic royalists and bureaucratic exploiters, environmental regulations will cause the company to put an end to certain lines of its business -- perhaps yours, and one of the favorites:

"Pie in the sky when you die" if you are a perfect servant of the ruling elite, and eternal damnation for anyone who challenges the economic overlords.

They can create ethnic and religious wedges. They work hand in glove with fundamentalist Protestant groups that dominate the culture of the American South, at least among white people. Sanctimonious morality combined with superstition can lead people to identify with their exploiters and abusers.

[_ed_]

56. "Working people" who vote Republican are stupid.

.

[Armstead]

2. Most of us don't get it either

The only real explanation I can come up with, in a political sense, is that conservatives fight for their principals, and have the GOP as their pit bulls....While liberals are gun shy and have the Democratics as tbe Party of Poodles failing to really represent the interests of the working class

[Jmaxfie1]

3. Fear and disinformation mostly

Convince them that if you don't vote for them the country is going to be a sex-crazed atheist socialist state that bans the Bible and forces your kids to be gay.

[GoCubsGo]

41. And...

...convince them that it's because of the unions that their jobs were shipped overseas, and that it's the unions' fault their state and local governments are in debt, and that their kids are doing so poorly in school because their teachers belong to a union. It's what the numbskulls in my state believe, even though the public school teachers here are 100% non-union. I live in South Carolina, where it's illegal for public employees to unionize. Yet the brain-dead here, and there are LOTS of them, think our state's woes are all the fault of public works unions.

[handmade34]

4. Robert Reich explains it well

[Orrex]

25. And when you say that, you apparently don't have to say anything more...

[Flubadubya]

86. Let me see if I can help her out...

"The Republican Shakedown" may be what she is referring to:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-republican-shakedown_b_827706.html

It's a great read if you haven't yet. :hi:

[Orrex]

88. Thanks!

I love Reich's commentary (though I'd like him to be a little more sharply critical of military spending).

Still, I wasn't sure how/when/where he "said it best." Thanks for the link!

[Flubadubya]

89. Most welcome...

Here's my favorite one-line quote from the whole article that speaks to the truth more directly than anything else. Really sums it all up.

"The truth is if the super-rich paid their fair share of taxes, government wouldn't be broke."

[NOLALady]

5. I don't get it either.

But, I have seen it all my life in my part of the world. They have always voted against their best interests. They rage at other Americans for fear "those unqualified Americans are trying to take the jobs of real Americans".

I just shake my head! :shrug:

[jaysunb]

6. C'mon now....you know exactly how they do it.

Race, race ,race ! It's not your fault, it's those "others." (insert any other race, ethnicity, or culture than White American)
Greed ....It worked for them so it must be the way.
Selfishness...I don't want to share !
Stupidity... see all the above.

Message: We're on YOUR side (wink,wink, add dog whitstle )


just vote for XXX and you'll be ok ...

:evilfrown:

k&r hoping to get others to see or comment on reality.

[Fuzz]

10. But sharing and greed can't be it because so many of them don't have anything, yet

they still argue for policies that hurt them.

[jaysunb]

13. See # 1

It's really the bottom line and it tees the others up. Seriously :hi:

[Phentex]

37. Add fear to the list...

The "libruls" will come and take your children at night!

[Solomon]

42. I was hoping somebody else would say it so I wouldn't have to.

Race is everything. The true underlying fear.

[TahitiNut]

50. Sadly, you've got it, my friend.

Appalling, isn't it? :puke:

[jaysunb]

78. Welcome home...

I been worried about you. :hi:

[TahitiNut]

83. No worries, mate.

:pals: :fistbump:

[Kip Humphrey]

52. "Look, over there!... They make more, have more then you. Don't you just hate that? Don't you

just HATE THEM?!!!"

etc, etc, etc.

[Lyric]

7. In two ways:

1) They have managed to cast Democrats as the "Anti-God" party and themselves as the "Holy" party.

2) They have eliminated the idea of nuanced thinking and grey areas; their voter base truly believes that life is a black/white, right/wrong binary system with no exceptions, and this belief is carefully nurtured and tended by the right-wing politicians, pundits, and religious leaders.

Therefore, since--
(a) There is Right and Wrong, but nothing in between, and
(b) Democrats are on the "wrong" side of at least some issues (in regard to "God"), then:
(c) It stands to reason that if Democrats are "morally wrong" about SOME issues, then in a black-and-white world, they are perceived as "morally wrong" about ALL issues. Not by ALL conservatives and working people, but by enough of a margin to make the difference.

This is why Republicans fight SO hard to promote, defend, and maintain their "moral absolutist" value system. It's the crucial base of their pyramid of deception. If people start unlearning the brainwashing and realizing that the world really ISN'T black-and-white, they'll start judging politicians with a wider, more comprehensive value system. And Republicans simply cannot have THAT.

So long as they can maintain the illusion that opposing ANY part of the Christian God's "will" makes you automatically evil, and therefore wrong on EVERY issue, they'll be able to keep the enough of the working class voting against their own best economic interests to maintain their hold on power.

[deutsey]

46. I forgot who it was the other night on MSNBC who talked about "narrative reality" vs "real reality"

He was on on the evening shows and talking about Walker, but I thought it was an interesting insight into the GOP strategy in general.

If I remember it correctly, the person was saying that Walker had to maintain the image of being tough and unbending because that's part of the narrative that his supporters believe in. He said all politicians to some extent play into the "narrative reality" of their supporters, but they also deal in "real reality" when negotiating and compromising with the other side to pass legislation. However, Walker is completely lost in his ideology's narrative reality and apparently not interested in the real political realities of being a governor.

I think more and more that's how most GOP politicians are.

[BobbyBoring]

90. That's it in a nut shell.

To them, people are either conservative or liberal. There's no center. That's why anyone remotely moderate got their walking papers the last 2 election cycles.

[WinkyDink]

8. "God, Guns, and Guts" I believe is the explanatory slogan.

[Lil Missy]

14. "God, Guns, and GAYS" n/t

[WinkyDink]

87. No; the slogan I used refers to that to which the ignorant masses ADHERE.

[joeunderdog]

9. There will always be chickens

who vote for Col. Sanders.

[socialist_n_TN]

11. Because the puppet MASTERS behind the Republican......

puppets are wealthy capitalist families and syndicates that have had GENERATIONS to perfect their divide and conquer tactics. What they can use to divide us DOES NOT MATTER. Whether it's religion, race, economic status (and that's a real laugh since no one that's being divided HAS any economic status compared to them), or whatever the "enemy of the day" is, I repeat, DOES NOT MATTER. As long as it does it's job of division. In short, they've had a lot of practice.

[socialshockwave]

12. Spin-doctors.

The Right have some of the best of them.

They get out there and they spin, spin spin; so much that the enemies of conservatism itself; the workers, believe it.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

16. all that and the growth of low wage

service type jobs. People being too busy with survival issues to pay attention. Shrinking middle class. The jobs that are available seem to pay a lot (50,000 and up, but you need to be younger, have experience and a couple of college degrees) or barely anything, $20,000 a year. Its hard to get excited about defending unions when you will never have a chance to join one, and organizing has been all but outlawed. Why defend the people that brought you the weekend when you work weekends, for $10.00 an hour.

The fear that knowing if you lose your job, you will have a hell of time finding another one, and all bets are off if you are over 50. No matter what you think in your heart, your stomach tells you to go with the flow, and not make waves.

Seeing everything, and I mean everything (except that paycheck) increase in price.

Knowing that you can yelp all you want about the banksters, and wall street, but nothing is ever going to change.

note: I do not think this way, but am just repeating some of the stuff I hear from others.

[kentuck]

17. They don't teach civics in school anymore for a reason...

It might brainwash children into thinking for themselves.

[Recursion]

18. Simply asserting that you know what "their interests" are doesn't help

Ask a better question: what are the interests that they are voting for? Why do they see their interests so differently than I see mine?

[Fuzz]

22. I cited two, those not enough to get started?

[ClassWarrior]

33. I'm beginning to wonder if you seriously don't WANT to get it.

Several people gave you serious, thoughtful answers, and your response is to feign confusion to one of them?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

31. Well said.

NGU.

[Gregorian]

19. Obedience

[moondust]

20. It's all just a big football game?

They picked the side they're on a long time ago and they still want their side to win?

:shrug:

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

21. another thing I just thought of, is that the

repubs have been very, very successful in convincing a hell of a lot of people that there is absolutely no difference in the parties. There are huge amounts of people that see no difference between the parties, so why not vote R, at least they won't increase taxes--------------------------------------------------------------------------- (except we all know the tricky ways the R's do increase taxes (federal tax cuts for the rich, local and state tax increases for us.)

Over and over I hear variations on the "they are all corrupt, they are exactly the same" line.

[RagAss]

23. Hate always works.

[Newest Reality]

24. Consider the evolving science of manufactured consent

that started with Freud's Nephew, Bernays. There have been decades of research and experimentation in persuasion and social engineering of all kinds. It can be customized and targeted as needed.

Media manipulation is so pervasive and ubiquitous in this culture, (and now, around the World) that many of us would have to stop and really think about how our own values and beliefs were formed before we could even begin to see just how influential this methodology is. It's influence is hidden in plain sight.

Since the choice was either conquest or consent, we see that consent was chosen and it has, for the most part, worked extremely well to pull a world over our eyes. It manages perception, frames and filters issues, and creates artificial needs that are merely an inducement to consume.

So, when you wonder about those who are so easily manipulated, selectively, by the corporately controlled system and its media, it is a good idea to do what we could advise those who buy the magic spell to do: Turn it around and take a good look at who is forging and crafting the messages and injecting them, via media, into the minds of the culture. They use diversions, distractions and divisiveness in a way that keeps the real players out of the picture. There is much skill an precision behind it.

What with being deliberately dumbedd-down with what can hardly be called education, and discouraged from thinking critically or making the effort to validate anything, (rather than encouraged to develop the mind and love learning) how can some people be anything other than ignorant and steered? Yes, there is willful ignorance, but that's a choice not a culturally-induced necessity.

Understanding how this works gives us the potential to look at those who vote and rally against their own interests, and even ourselves, in much different light. We can and must see it to unplug from it. We could consider the impact of a propagandist environment on those whom we think disagree with us when actually, they are agreeing with what they are told convincingly by the system itself.

[snot]

76. +1

[ClassWarrior]

26. Read "Don't Think of an Elephant" by George Lakoff, "Conservatives Without Conscience"...

...by John Dean and "What's the Matter with Kansas" by Thomas Franks.

Value systems trump economic interests in today's political dialogue.

NGU.

[MicaelS]

36. That is the answer, excellent phrase, I'll remember that ....

"Value systems trump economic interests in today's political dialogue."

[customerserviceguy]

27. Repukes are experts

at creating "us vs. them" dichotomies. As union membership in things other than government has greatly decreased, it becomes easier for them to make union public employees a "them". "They" get cheap health insurance, "we" get hammered for higher premiums, deductibles, and co-pays, and rather than blame cheap-ass employers, "we" get pissed at "them" for wanting to keep what "we" had, yet no longer possess.

Repigs are good at this game, apparently.

[ljm2002]

28. Guns, God, Gays, Greed...

...the 4 Gs.

Those commie pinko liberals are gonna take your guns.

Those commie pinko godless liberals are immoral sex fiends and baby-killers who don't even believe in God, or at least not the right one.

Those commie pinko godless fag-lovin' liberals are against marriage and everything you hold sacred and they promote the Gay Lifestyle.

Greed is Good, when it's God-loving Conservative corporate cronies and banksters. But not when it's Greedy Unions who are robbing the hard-workin' taxpayers like yourselves. Why one day you, too, could be rich in this Greatest of All Possible Countries. But not with any help from those commie pinko godless fag-lovin' liberals, who just want to steal your money and redistribute it to the lazy shiftless blacks and oh yeah, the illegals who come here and steal all the good jobs.

Something like that.

[JoePhilly]

43. Along with "false patriotisim" and xenophopia

The God fearing, gun toting, folks have been told that they are "real Americans" and liberals, gays and immigrants (at least those that can't pass as white) are not.

The right wing media tells them that the left wants to kill their God, take their guns, and ruin America. So they see it as their patriotic duty to vote for the GOP. And if they lose their job, the liberals took it.

[du_da]

49. In all fairness

there are enough on our side telling them we want to kill their god and take their guns that they don't need the media to come to that final conclusion.

We are often our own worst enemy.


How many times have you read someone make a comment implying that those on the right are being stupid by letting issues like gun control for example dictate their voting decisions and imply that they should just let the issue in question go because it isn't a big deal. Yet, you don't see the individual or any of us making the argument letting go that same issue go that one of our own just defined as so minor as to not being a factor. The assumption that we know what is in their best interest is the at heart of the conflict. We then compound it because we often have no qualms establishing a double standard.

[JoePhilly]

71. Except ...

On God

No one of any real importance on the left says that your worship of your God needs to be outlawed. No one. Bill O'Reilly's "war on Christmas" nonsense is manufactured by the right. It is a war that no leader on the left participates in.

Now, on the right, you can find ELECTED GOP members who are ACTIVELY trying to outlaw Islam in the US. Trying to prevent Mosques from being built. That would be a true limit on religious freedom.

And then, you have lots of GOP elected officials calling for more "school prayer". This one I love. Anytime this comes up I ask a very simple question ... "Can I be the one who picks the prayers?"

Think about it. If you want school prayer, then you have to decide not only what major religion (Christianity, Islam, Judaism), you also need to select which SECT from which to take the prayer.

And so, if you are against manditory prayer in school, or support all religions being able to worship freely ... that is called an "attack on Christianity".

On guns
Again a manufactured fight. Obama is going to take your guns!!!!! Ooohhh, scary.

In reality, there should be an honest debate about the most effective way to regulate guns. License requirements. Education. Background checks. But no. To even suggest that we need to have such discussions is "an attack on gun owners".

[du_da]

80. Do you realize

that you just proved my point?

[JoePhilly]

84. Sure, that's what happened ...

I actually responded to you directly on the two points you mention.

And you provided a rather standard right wing non-response.

[du_da]

85. Go back and reread my post then your response

specially your response to gun control. You are taking the very dismissive approach to them that I described. Regardless of the accuracy of your statement the tone is the key to the discussion at hand.

[JoePhilly]

91. The tone is very key.

The notion of even discussing gun control measures, even just the mere suggestion of that discussion, is proclaimed by the right as an attack ON the right.

If the suggestion that we should have a realistic discussion about it is itself an "attack" ... its pretty tough to go anywhere else in that situation, wouldn't you agree?

Even right after Gabby Giffords was shot in the head, the suggestion that maybe we should look into whether average citizens need 30 round clips was met (basically) with a "Hell no you can't!!" response from the NRA and elected GOP leaders.

To paraphrase .... "Can we have a discussion on that very narrow and specific topic?" ... "Hell no you can't!!!"

Returning to my original point on how some people end up voting against their own economic interests, I'll put it this way.

On media outlets like Fox news, there is an endless stream of claims that the Obama administration, again paraphrasing:

"... is going to come a take your guns, then his administration will open the borders to the Mexicans, give reparations in the form of "welfare" to the blacks, followed by forcing you to pay for your wife to have an abortion she didn't want, performed by a gay OBGYN ... after which his administration will destroy your marriage by making you sing show tunes, while simultaneously banning the bible and forcing your kids to convert to Islam ... and then after all that ... that's when Obama's death panels kill granny."

The people who believe this kind of nonsense are the ones who vote against their best interests.

[du_da]

92. I don't disagree with you

however when you call their value system nonsense and claim to no more about what is in their best interest than they do, what possible reaction other than defensive can you expect from them?

Are some of these values ingrained to a level that it is challenging for us to find a way to address them, absolutely. However, when we fail to do so that is our fault. Use the gun control issue you took such care to break down. When was the last time we asked ourselves why they are so invested in this issue before trying to make changes. Using that specific example, the conversation breaks down so quickly because both sides are approaching it from very different angles. We approach it from the perspective of what can we do to address an issue we feel needs to be addressed. They however are starting from the perspective that there is no authority to do so in the first place so they don't even get to the same point in the process we are at. With that in mind, the frustrating scenario you describe is entirely understandable. That however doesn't make it any less frustrating, I must admit that. However, when was the last time we took a step back and said ok you guys have concerns about the authority to do such a thing, lets fix that confusion. If we want them to listen, we have to learn how to participate in a conversation. Which is difficult for us because many on our side seem to think a conversation is a uni-directional process.

[Canuckistanian]

29. Do conservatives not belong to unions? Not collect SS? Not get their houses foreclosed?

And more importantly, not realize what CAUSED all of the above?

[KT2000]

30. Followers

Most people are followers and many are afraid. The RW has done a good job of gathering such people to their media and then they frame whatever it is they want them to believe in a narrative that make the followers feel smarter, better, safer and right.

Also - many people just do not like any other people except family - if that.

[raccoon]

64. "many people just do not like any other people except family - if that"

I think you've really got something there!

[OnionPatch]

32. I think they haven't read enough history.

The corporations have convinced them that taxation and regulation are destroying American business. They do it, of course, by owning and slanting the media and roping in those tending to racism and fear. They've given people some fantasy idea that if there were no rules or taxes, businesses would prosper and apparently a lot of people believe the newly freed and prosperous corporations would just happily share the wealth with their workers and treat them decently with no laws or requirements that they do so. If people read enough history, they would know how horribly working people have been treated throughout history, before unions, labor laws and minimum wages. I don't know what makes people think it would be any different now, especially with the greedy business class we have these days.

[OnyxCollie]

34. Once you understand the belief system of your audience,

a message can be crafted to easily manipulate them. Just use the biases, stereotypes, etc. to lead them in any direction you want.

I wrote a paper on this topic for a class I had. Here is part of the lit review:

“Behavior results from a process that involves, or functions as it entails, conscious
choice” (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These choices are developed through a method by which the
actor’s preferences are ordered and evaluated to determine which will provide the greatest utility
and what course of action should be taken to achieve them (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These
preferences include a predilection for survival (Chatterjee, 1972; Monroe & Maher, 1995).
Established and uniform, these preferences are shaped through the acquisition of information
(Jost et al., 2003) from opinion leaders whose function is to attach idea-elements together
(Converse, 1964).

This process of acquiring information from authoritative sources to satisfy preferences
which include survival is described as laying the foundation for a belief system (Converse, 1964;
Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999a, 1999b as cited in Jost et al., 2003; McGuire, 1985, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003). Converse (1964) and Kunda (1990, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) suggest that
this belief system is regulated by multiple constraints. The constraints offer a probability that a
specific attitude held in a belief system will result in certain other attitudes being held (Converse,
1964). These constraints are identified as logical, psychological, and social (Converse, 1964).
Jost et al. (2003) further expand on the concept by describing these constraints as existential
(fear, curiosity), epistemic (authoritarian, liberal), and ideological (group dominance,
egalitarianism). According to Jost et al. (2003), belief systems fulfill psychological needs.

Within the constraints, belief systems provide a principled doctrine by which new
information obtained is compared to prior associations in order to choose a course which
provides the greatest utility (Jost et al., 2003). However, these belief systems do not operate in a
vacuum; uncertain conditions and numerous variables can influence personal motivations by
invoking emotional responses, leading to a reformulation of logic that while not syllogistically
sound, is principled nonetheless (Jost et al., 2003).

Information gathering in early childhood requires the formation of relationships (Weber
& Federico, 2007). Attachment theory states that relationships are sought in order to reduce
anxiety and provide a sense of security (Sroufe & Waters, 1977, as cited in Weber & Federico,
2007). Successful proximity-seeking efforts create a secure attachment style, inspiring selfconfidence,
curiosity and an openness to new experiences (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Failed proximity-seeking efforts result in anxiety
stemming from the lack of security, compounded by distress over the failure to establish a
relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, as cited in Weber and Federico, 2007). Recurring
failure or inconsistency (Ainsworth et al., 1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) in
proximity-seeking efforts creates two insecure attachment styles; anxious and avoidant (Weber &
Federico, 2007).

Anxious attachment style is associated with fixations on proximity-seeking and emotional
support (Weber & Federico, 2007). Avoidant attachment style abandons proximity-seeking and
instead relies on self-dependence to control anxiety (Weber & Federico, 2007). Brennan, Clark,
& Shaver (1998, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have determined that anxious and avoidant
attachment styles in adults manifest themselves as either elevated states of arousal with a fixation
on close relationships, or as an emotional disconnect with an aversion to close relationships,
respectively.

Duckitt (2001, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) proposes that childrearing practices
lead to the development of personality traits which endorse world views that form ideology.
Children who have attained a secure attachment style are open to new information more than
those with either of the two insecure attachment styles (Cassidy, 1986, as cited in Weber &
Federico, 2007), as well as being less dogmatic and less reliant on ethnic stereotypes
(Mikulincer, 1997, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Additionally, Mikulincer & Florian
(2000, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have shown that secure attachment styles “mitigate
the effect of mortality salience on the denigration of moral transgressors” (p. 394).

It has been demonstrated that children who have attained insecure attachment styles later
as adults develop Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a
dangerous place (Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt & Fisher, 2003, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007),
or Social Dominance Order (SDO) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a competitive
jungle (Duckitt, 2001, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007). RWA’s are defined by a deference to
authority figures, an endorsement of severe punishment by authority figures, and a high degree
of conventionalism (Altemeyer, 2006). SDO’s differ from RWA’s in that rather than embracing
authoritarianism as a means of protection against an out-group which threatens society, SDO’s
feel that society has already fallen and that only the strong shall survive, prompting group
domination, punishment, and humiliation against out-groups (Altemeyer, 1998). Altemeyer
(1998, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) and Pratto, Sidanious, Stallworth & Malle (1994, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003) have shown that SDO’s correlate with Republican party identification.

In response to criticism that scales of authoritarianism neglected left-wing personalities,
Rokeach (1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) developed a scale of dogmatism which included
measures of logically contradictory beliefs and denial of contradictions in belief systems.
According to Rokeach:

All belief-disbelief systems serve two powerful and conflicting sets of
motives at the same time: the need for a cognitive framework to know
and to understand and the need to ward off threatening aspects of
reality. To the extent that the cognitive need to know is predominant
and the need to ward off threat is absent, open systems should
result. . . . But as the need to ward off threat becomes stronger, the
cognitive need to know should become weaker, resulting in more
closed belief systems (p. 67, as quoted in Jost et al., 2003, p. 346).

Thus, closed belief systems reduce ambiguity-induced anxiety by satisfying the need to know
(Rokeach, 1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003).

Understanding of issues and concepts is dependent upon the strength of the connotation
associated with them, as well as effectiveness of the constraints by which the referred issues and
concepts operate (Converse, 1964). In his research, Converse (1964) tests the hypothesis that if
one idea-element in the belief system should change, an individual must either change his
position on the issue or change his position on the party. Examination reveals a majority of the
population sampled are unable to express an understanding of the constraints affecting political
parties and issues without being prompted by political elites (Converse, 1964). Furthermore, the
majority of the population view the treatment they and other groups received from political
parties as their primary means of identifying parties (Converse, 1964).

Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–92.
Altemeyer, B. (2006). The authoritarians. Manitoba: University of Manitoba.
Chatterjee, P. (1972). The classical balance of power theory. Journal of Peace Research, 9(1), 51-61.
Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). New York: Free Press.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
Monroe, K.R. & Maher, K.H. (1995). Psychology and rational actor theory. Political Psychology, 16(1), 1-21.
Weber, C., & Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416.

Read about System Justification Theory, too.

A Decade of System Justification Theory:
Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious
Bolstering of the Status Quo

www.psych.nyu.edu/jost/Jost,%20Banaji,%20&%20Nosek%20 (2004)%20A%20Decade%20of%20System%20Justificati.pdf

(The link is too long. Copy & paste, and remove the space before the parenthesis.)

Most theories in social and political psychology stress self-interest, intergroup conflict, ethnocentrism,
homophily, ingroup bias, outgroup antipathy, dominance, and resistance.
System justification theory is influenced by these perspectives—including social identity
and social dominance theories—but it departs from them in several respects. Advocates of
system justification theory argue that (a) there is a general ideological motive to justify the
existing social order, (b) this motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization
of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups, (c) it is observed most readily at
an implicit, nonconscious level of awareness and (d) paradoxically, it is sometimes
strongest among those who are most harmed by the status quo. This article reviews and
integrates 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective,
focusing on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of
disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and
its relation to political ideology (especially liberalism-conservatism).

I hope this helps answer your question.

[ipaint]

35. Maybe they figure the Democrats have moved so far right in the last

30 years there must be something to the conservative ideology. Might as well vote for the real thing.

Truman said it but Democrats won't heed the warning.

“Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time”
Harry Truman

[Shandris]

38. Too many complicated answers to a simple problem, imo.

1. If you're religious, it's a non-choice. The religious believe abortion is murder, you vote conservative. Yes, it really is that simple in my area (rural-central Indiana). The fact that you can't go 3 blocks in a city without seeing a church only reinforces that.

2. For those who don't fall into the simple paradigm above is simple problem #2. These people have learned from their grandparents, their parents, their peers, their neighbors, the guy down the street, and they guy in the suit that THIS IS THE WAY IT IS (tm). If all these people are wrong...and they are wrong...then they have wasted their lives on a lie -- and NO ONE likes to be wrong. Most people, like it or not, will do everything in their power to not be wrong -- even if the only thing in their power is to lie to themselves. On some deep, down level they know it, and that's why they react SO vehemently when you get close to pointing it out to them -- they know that if they ever actually, truly admit it to themselves, everything they have built their faith on will come crashing down. Faith > reason.

First I was #1. Then I got over abortion and began to become #2. But fortunately, I have long believed that I need to challenge my own beliefs every day or else I may fall victim to complacency, and to me there is no greater failure. That's how I got past #2, and reached out to a progressive friend who helped me sort out the tangled jumbo of 30 years of near-fundamentalist Christian midwest family conservatism.

[Vinca]

40. It boggles the mind. Take abortion and health care.

Save the embryos, let the living and breathing die.

[deutsey]

44. They learned a long time ago that most people aren't swayed by logical arguments

but can, instead, be psychologically manipulated through appealing to their irrational fears and desires.

Edward Bernays (Freud's nephew) was instrumental in developing this approach to mass manipulation in the 20th century.

Check out a BBC series called "Century of the Self":


The Century Of Self Part 1 (of 4) Happiness Machines58:16 - 2 years ago

The story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays.

Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud's ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn't need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires.

Bernays was one of the main architects of the modern techniques of mass-consumer persuasion, using every trick in the book, from celebrity endorsement and outrageous PR stunts, to eroticising the motorcar. His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom.

But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile. It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today's world.

LINK: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6718420906413643126#

[rdking647]

47. the american president

did you ever see the movie the american president with michael douglas?
president shepard says

"You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character."

only in this case the repugs rely on a lack of education to convince people that so called enemys liek allegal immigrants or liberals are the cause of "harder times"

[IDemo]

48. "White collar, blue collar, these are people of modest means..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

[ksilvas]

51. The big 3 of tyranny, Race, Religion and Money

Works every time on those of limited funds and education.

[spanone]

53. they did the same with healthcare

[QC]

55. The Right in this country has spent the last forty years propagandizing

the middle and working classes. They have created an entire intellectual and media infrastructure dedicated to presenting their perspective to those classes *and* the governing elite, everything from mouth-breathing hate radio screamers to Ivy League "scholars" ready at a moment's notice to produce position papers on anything the oligarchy desires, complete with footnotes.

With a few notable exceptions, the Left has spent those same forty years snarking at working people. Our intellectuals have, again with notable exceptions, retreated into bourgeois "cultural left" nonsense like composing Lacanian analyses of Madonna videos.

In other words, the Right has been fighting like hell for four decades and we have mostly sat out that fight.

We are now seeing the results. I guess it's nice to know that some of Madonna's videos in/(sub)vert the Lacanian idea of "the Law of the Father," though.

[mistertrickster]

57. Well . . . the simplest explanation is that starting with the Civil Rights

movement and then the "long-haired hippy" war protesters and then the feminists and now the gays, the radical left was perceived as standing outside the mainstream.

I know, I know. That's not fair. But a lot of the staid, middle-class white America did not identify with these struggles.

And so they turned to the straight, white man's party, where a "man can still be a man!"

That's my take. It's just an opinion . . . I'm not casting blame. But when liberals fight for the rights of minorities, there's going to be a backlash among the bigoted and hateful.

And that's exactly what we're seeing.

Putting the focus on back on wages would be one way to find common cause with the disaffected working class again.

[Omaha Steve]

58. Guns, Abortion, I don't like the D candidate

Did I miss anything?

[flamingdem]

59. It's because in America NICE = PUSSY / WEAK

and they don't identify with "liberal" values as defined by Fox News

[flamingdem]

60. Actually there is really mostly one reason FOX NEWS

Thanks Murdoch

[sarcasmo]

61. One issue, abortion. They vote against their best interests because the right wants to abolish

abortions.

[bigmonkey]

62. They nakedly assert that the profit motive is natural law.

If you accept that (and they have a large voice in the society that proclaims that it's true), then, since it's natural law, the greedy behavior of businessmen and corporations is also natural. Taxes would just be "passed on to the consumer", so they're pointless. Regulation is likewise futile, because it's "natural" for the profit motive to work around regulation. The humans just need to adapt to the "natural" situation. It's "unnatural" to tax or regulate.

Mind you, it's a bunch of horse crap. But the error is at the basic philosophical level, which has little traction in American discourse. I would counter it with education about the philosophical basis of capitalistic theorizing.

[blm]

63. The fascists spent the 80s and 90s buying control of broadcast newsmedia. That's HOW they did it

and why it has been relatively easy for them to dupe their targeted (dumbed down) audience the last 2 decades.

[HughBeaumont]

65. I think one of the biggest reasons is this:

The belief among the slap-assed in Horatio Alger. That "they're a-gonna be RICH someday, and I want all them thur laws and perks the rich get when I enter that club, heh heh heh!" That "if yew aren't successful, durn it, it's becawz ye ain't Workin' HARD ENOUGH!" At it's core is underlying victim-blame, with a bit of superiority thrown in.

As long as they keep believing that myth; that they'll beat the odds and won't die in the same caste they were born in, they'll keep voting for the party that keeps that lie alive for them.

[GeorgeGist]

66. The Dumbing down of America ...

reached critical mass when SCOTUS was allowed to select Shrub for President. Even Gore was too dumb to object.

[cynatnite]

67. They wrapped themselves in a flag and carried around a cross...

That's how they did it.

[Zoeisright]

68. Abortion!!!!! Guns!!!!!!! Gays!!!!!!!

Idiots will always be distracted by hot button topics. Just like a one-year-old, they are easily distracted by shiny objects. And they have the reasoning power of that age group too.

[ehrnst]

69. Propaganda. Really well crafted, profuse and loud lying in many venues. (nt)

[eppur_se_muova]

70. An old Russian joke ...

One day, a poor farmer is visited by a genie. The genie agrees to grant him any one wish. The poor farmer wishes for a cow, so that his family will never do without fresh milk. The genie grants his wish.

His neighbor, hearing this story, berates the poor farmer: "You could have wished for anything! Gold, jewels, beautiful women, a tsar's ransom! Instead, you stupid clod, you wished for a cow!" "But my family is happy", responded the farmer. And the truth was, his family was happy. His children were healthy and well fed, and his wife sold a little milk to provide a small income to purchase household necessities. Because of the genie's gift, the poor farmer was now living better than his neighbors, if only slightly. "It's so unfair!" complained his neighbor. "He did nothing to deserve better than us!" and his resentment of the poor farmer's good fortune burned and grew in his heart.

Then one day, the genie returned, this time visiting the poor farmer's neighbor. Now the opportunity was his, and this time the scales would be balanced! "I will grant you any one wish", said the genie, "whatever it is". "I know exactly what I want!" growled the neighbor. "I want my neighbor's cow to die!"




(When foreigners ask why things don't ever seem to get better in Russia, they may be treated to some version of this story in answer.)

[LiberalEsto]

72. Propaganda

Fox
Control of a large part of the nation's mass media
Right-wing talk shows
Endless, planned attacks on liberals and Democrats
Murdoch
The moronification of working people by means of poor education and imbecilic television

[Cherchez la Femme]

73. Spelled out right in their name, 1st three letters in fact

They Con the people.

[StarburstClock]

74. History has plenty of examples, for instance pre-WWII Germany

Racial hatreds, ultra-nationalism, propaganda, militarism, violence, political criminals. Put them all together and terrible things happen, deal with them and terrible things can be prevented.

[jaysunb]

82. Bingo !

You win the prize ! :)

[Vinee]

75. I think maybe they just hate liberals so much that they don't really care.

I think plenty of them are quite pissed off about these "austerity measures" being imposed on Americans however. Maybe enough to hold the senate in 2012.

[BreweryYardRat]

77. You provided one reason yourself.

"Instead of seeing benefits union members may get as something every working person in this country deserves, they would rather take it away from people because 'I don't have it, why should they'."

Never underestimate spite.

[upi402]

79. the media the media the media

the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media
the media the media the media the media the media the media

[datasuspect]

81. television and media

uhhhmerica

[mockmonkey]

93. I'm in Wisconsin

and all I hear from the working class is about how those Teachers should stop protesting. I'm living in WTF Land. At work they put Fox news on the TV in one of the lunchrooms and throughout the plant I hear these young guys listening to Coast to Coast at night.

I visit my Mom and she has Fox news on and I tell her stop listening to that shit. She's becoming someone I don't even know anymore.