I was once very convinced that being a liberal had something to do with intelligence. That liberals were actually more intellegent than conservatives. It wasn’t a bias so much as careful observation. Every Republican I met seemed a little … well, stupid. I remember reading an article from the UCSD Guardian while I was a student there which complained about the hegemony of liberal professors on campuses across the country. Of course professors are liberals, I thought. They’re smart people and smart people are on the left. Conservatives are dimwits, religious zealots, red-necks, and trust fund babies.
Reading blogs has changed all that though. I’ve come to realize that there are some very very intelligent conservatives out there. People who believe (and are probably right) that they have worked for everything they have and that you should do the same. It’s that feeling you get when reading Ayn Rand – empowering self-reliance which borders on Fascist environmental destruction when implemented on the macro level.
So my new conclusion. Amongst those who really take the time to care and evaluate objectively (as possible) their political leanings, one’s political view is an extension of where their heart is at. If you are a giving person accustomed to adaptation you will probably consider yourself a liberal. (and if you went to college you will probably try to intellectualize why you are a liberal rather than seeing it as an extension of your heart, not your mind). If you are greedy and have an aversion to change you will probably intellectualize your conservativeness.
Most political scientists would be against such a conclusion because it means studying psychology, humanity, and spirtuality to find an answer for how we choose how we are governed. I’d be curious to hear what you have to say.
i consider myself a giving person who welcomes change and adaptation, but if you call me a liberal ill smack you upside and downside….on the other hand if you called me a conservative i’d charge you with slander. i think a problem we have in this culture is the need to identify with one group or the other, a two party system. as much as i love liberals, i refuse to be categorized as such for one extreme is just as bad as the other. independent thought begins to break down and people just fall into line with their fellow team-members. say it!
I used to think of myself as conservative because I believed in self-reliance. The more I learn about the world, the more I discover about the structural obstacles people face. Thus people can’t really depend on self-reliance alone. I might be called a liberal now, but I would not call myself one. I would not call myself conservative either. Unlike Rex, however, I would not be offended if you call me either. My beliefs tend to be very liberatarian. Let people do what they want. However, sometimes the playing field is not even and some oportunities need to opened. I do believe that the government has no place in legislating morality. It is a very slippery slope.
Interesting and thoughtful post.
Intelligent conservatives? I mean this with the utmost sincerity: please offer a few URLs to visit. Every conservative / Republican / right-wing web site I’ve gone to has been full of racism, hatred, aggressive stupidity, and selfishness. Of course, I’ve been noticing a new breed of liberal popping up on the ‘net, too: the blind, rabid cheerleader. They just blindly follow anyone who vocalizes something against the right, regardless if it is just as bad as what the right spews. They were the rabid ABBs before the Iowa Caucus even began. They’re the ones that are ok with Randi Rhodes treating Nader like she was Hannity, or Medved, or Limbaugh. *sigh*
Neo-cons are not conservative but simply anti-liberal. Liberal is not intellligence but simply a view that the best directives always benefit the most people and that isn’t the wealthy powerful elite who incidentally the neo-cons serve.