eagleye13 Loc: Fl

The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Liberal Madness
"I bought the e-book version as we speak."
The PREFACE happens to coincide with my views, so I'm not discouraged that I'm on the right trail. The Preface follows:

Preface
This book is about human nature and human freedom, and the relationship between them. Its contents are an outgrowth of my life-long interest in how the mind works. That interest, beginning at about age twelve, eventually led me to careers in clinical and forensic psychiatry and to the particular access these disciplines provide to human psychology. Disorders of personality have been a special focus of this interest. First in clinical practice and then in forensic evaluations, I have had the opportunity to study the nature of personality and the factors, which affect its development. The practice of forensic psychiatry has permitted an especially close look at the manner in which all mental illnesses, including personality disorders, interact with society’s rules for acceptable conduct.
These rules, both civil and criminal, largely define the domains of human freedom and the conditions that ground social order. Historically, of course, western ideas about freedom and social order have come from fields quite distant from psychiatry: philosophy, ethics, jurisprudence, history, theology, economics, anthropology, sociology, art and literature, among others. But the workings of the human mind as understood by psychiatry and psychology are necessarily relevant to these disciplines and to the social institutions that arise from them. This book is an attempt to connect mechanisms of the mind to certain economic, social and political conditions, those under which freedom and order may flourish. Although I have made strenuous efforts to follow where reason leads, I have not written this book out of intellectual interest alone. My intent has been more “generative” than that, to use one of Erik Erikson’s terms. It has, in fact, grown out of a deep concern for the future of ordered liberty. In their efforts “to form a more perfect Union,” America’s founding fathers intended, as the Preamble tells us, to establish justice, insure peace, provide for the nation’s defense, promote its general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty. But the entire twentieth century, and the dawn of the twenty-first, have witnessed modern liberalism’s relentless attacks on all of these goals and on all of the principles on which individual liberty and rational social order rest. Although they are strikingly deficient in political substance, these attacks have nevertheless been successful in exploiting the psychological nature of man for socialist purposes. To counter the destructiveness of these attacks requires a clear understanding of the relationship between human psychology and social process. It is my hope that this book makes at least a small contribution to that purpose.
L.H. Rossiter, Jr. February 2006

Rossiter Jr. M.D, Lyle H.. The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness (p. viii). Kindle Edition.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Eagle, The internet offers varying views on both liberalism/conservatism...for example:

Is Political Conservatism a Mild Form of Insanity?

By William Todd Schult, Ph.D.

Posted Sep 06, 2008

A few years ago I was standing on the deck of a beach house on the 4th of July and a person who had obviously drunk too much told me, “The secret of my life is that I always need someone to h**e.”

I was reminded of this exchange while watching the stupendously ruthless Republican National Convention over the last several days. Is there anything that conservatives do not h**e? Maybe drilling. In fact, they appear utterly phallically obsessed with drilling (a practice that, in about 10 years or so, might reduce gas prices by 2 or 3 cents per gallon). But otherwise, what we learned from the recent h**efest is that Republicans h**e community organizers, liberals (surprise!), Madonna, the “east coast elite,” the “angry left” media, trial lawyers, people who are too smart, people who are “cosmopolitan”—the list goes on into eternity.

Listening to this litany on Wednesday night in particular reminded me of a research article that came out roughly 5 years ago on political conservatism and motivated social cognition (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski & Sulloway, “Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition,” Psychological Bulletin). In a nutshell, the article—by Stanford and UC Berkeley researchers—seems to suggest that conservatism is a mild form of insanity.

Here are the facts. A meta-analysis culled from 88 samples in 12 countries, and with an N of 22,818, revealed that “several psychological variables predicted political conservatism.” Which variables exactly? In order of predictive power: Death anxiety, system instability, dogmatism/intolerance of ambiguity, closed-mindedness, low tolerance of uncertainty, high needs for order, structure, and closure, low integrative complexity, fear of threat and loss, and low self-esteem. The researchers conclude, a little chillingly, that “the core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and a justification of ine******y.”

The above list of variables is more than a little unsavory. We are talking about someone full of fear, with a poor sense of self, and a lack of mental dexterity. I always tell my students that tolerance of ambiguity is one especially excellent mark of psychological maturity. It isn’t a black and white world. According to the research, conservatives possess precisely the opposite: an intolerance of ambiguity and an inability to deal with complexity. Maybe that’s one reason why Obama seems so distasteful to them: he is a nuanced, multi-faceted thinker who can see things from several different perspectives simultaneously. And he isn’t preaching fear, either.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

There is just no way around it slat;
The liberals gave us the Clintons and Obama.
They even tried to get the HildaBeast elected, with all her baggage.

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Ask Slatton if he would have preferred Hilderbeast over President Trump he wouldn’t answer me.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Yep;
That is a good question for him to dodge.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

If all else fails; go to your safe place.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

One might think so, EE, but the question came soon after I reminded Hemiman that I couldn't/wouldn't have v**ed for either Trump or Clinton. If you remember, I wrote in Jim Webb. Denying Hemiman the answer he sought is not the same as dodging his question. If I told him what he wanted to read/hear, he likely would have doubted me...or, even called me a liar. There is no pacifying some people, except to acquiesce to their demands or way of thinking.

My post in response to your initial one was simply to show/prove that one can find wh**ever they want to find on the internet to serve a purpose: "Eagle, The internet offers varying views on both liberalism/conservatism...for example:" I personally believe there is enough nonsense coming from both left and right to justify having said that some from each have lost their senses.

bylm1-Bernie

I will grant you, Slat, that there are ample writings on the internet to back up or attack almost any view on anything. However, I have read both these offerings above and I find the opinions of Dr Rossiter to be much more clinical and less h**eful than those of Prof Schultz.
Going to Stanford and UC Berkeley to garner accurate views on conservatism would be like researching Christianity by interviewing imams. Schultz is using an opinion of a drunk to springboard into a dissertation on how h**eful conservatives are. I realize these are anecdotal examples but read several from various l*****ts and conservatives and ask yourself which ones express h**e to a greater degree.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

That is true, there is corruption in BOTH parties; but the Dems threatened to give us The Beast.
The end of our Constitutional Republic would have been the result.
Slat; You can't be for that, can you?
Judges in the Supreme Court rewriting the Constitution.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Thank you for a reasonable and thoughtful response, Bylm1. I simply went with the first link/article that supported the point I was attempting to make. Eagleye13's posting of Dr. Rossiter's opinion is just the latest in numbers of them on OPP. It is not difficult to find confirmation bias supporting ones views. Both/all sides are guilty of it. That is what leads to discourse, rather useful or not.

BTW, one would be hard-pressed to consider Dr. Rossiter an unbiased source for an opinion on conservatism vs. liberalism.

Again, thanks

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

"I realize these are anecdotal examples but read several from various l*****ts and conservatives and ask yourself which ones express h**e to a greater degree."

bylm1; You hit a home run.
The Liberals sure like to use the "h**e" word a lot.
But in my book; actions speak much louder than words.

bylm1-Bernie

You're no doubt right, Slat, about Dr Rossiter being somewhat biased, but, then, is it possible to find an unbiased person these days? I confess that I am not one. Bernie

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Excellent point, Bylm1/Bernie. That is pretty much what I've tried to say/write...without much success, I guess.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Not my words, but taken from an on-line blogger concerning h**eful conservatives, but easily pertains to liberals, also....

"This would depend on what you put into label of conservative. Taking a five minute view to consider a trend to putting labeling all conservatives being h**eful or h**ers that are ignorant by nature shows a bias on your part.

Passionate statements and answers people make are generally based on how they were raised and their own personal experiences in life. Many use hatreds of others to create a desired outcome for particular situations (spinning it to fit). By using deceptive practices to inflame and conjure emotions to a level of h**e or heated debate. Something like flickering a rubber bait hook in front of a hungry fish at sunset. People bite and the spin masters gain an audience.

I believe we each have an obligation to each other to help each other with understanding and learning in what the causes and remedies against true hatred are. We are our brothers keepers.

Certain persons would also call me a neocon conservative for believing in Jesus as my savior. Some treat me with hatred for my beliefs. When it is clear you could not simply get to know who I am and what is in my heart in only five minutes.

I do have to admit though I have hatred for certain things in the world. Corruption that has been allowed to run rampant in our country has brought it to a very dangerous level. So we are h**ed by others even though the majority of us simply wish to live in peace. Greed has consumed and the anger runs wild through the nation as people try to survive and keep their goodies like fancy houses and cars. Many who have previously sold out or given in by thinking they are secure in their jobs and they allowed the corruption to take over. By not being their brothers keepers they have invited the wolves in the door.

I grew up believing as an American I would have freedom, justice and be treated equally as a human being. This has not been the case in all instances. Yet I would not trade my country for another just because of a few ignorant or greedy people. I would hope that not everyone would attempt to assess the whole situation in a few minutes though by labeling all conservatives h**eful and ignorant by nature."

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

eagleye13, What nonsense. Where in the DSM does it say that liberalism is a psychological illness? If the far right can't respond to a question or situation, this is the kind of stuff they love to quote. I guess FDR, JFK, both Clintons, Nelson Rockefeller, etc., etc. were all crazy. I only hope we get more candidates like them elected. Instead of trying to defame an entire ideology, that has proven to reform America from monopoly, terrible laws and other anti democratic practices from the rich and powerful, the right has to resort to this kind of nonsense.