It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservatism a side-effect of Institutionalism?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Without getting into who believes what politically. Why is conservatism always for the most part an instituionalized learned trait?

People aren't born conservative, and half of people stay liberal for a majority of their lives. But it appears that most conservatism is attatched to institutions. (Ex: religion, military, police, fraternities, family, closed socieities like the menanites, etc, etc...).

I'd like to hear your thoughts on Conservatism as a result of Institutionalism.

EDIT: I don't mean conservative on one issue, but wholy and entirely a red blood conservative.

[edit on 3/21/2008 by Choronzon]




posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Not sure about that. May be a little to general of a statement.

I was raised quite liberal/democratic, later switched to Bush lovin Republican, and now am somewhere in the middle.

I've typically found that people usually stay with what they learned as children as the path of their life is often begun at a very young age, and with a start many like a finish. Bouncing around in your position isn't something I see as often as I'd have figured.

But, that's just me.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
How would you rate your acquaintances politically, a majority conservative or liberal ?

Also, do you attench church regularly?

Are you exposed to more conservatives?



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I think that conservatism is a reaction to liberalism and vice versa. This is due to the fact that the desired "center-oriented" approach always fails. So people who are more "x"-inclined think that witching to "x" helps. Naturally it does not, "y" inclined then try and also fail and it goes on and on.
Funniest thing is that in the process "x" takes "y" ideology and "y" takes "x"'s.Takes about a century for a switch. We as Humans are weird creatures.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I do agree that they can be the end resulting reaction of each other.

But the nature of the post is to discuss why a 'majority' of conservatism is tied to social institutions. Why it maybe a learned behavioral pattern and why people are not born conservative.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Not always. Person who is born to religious family will more likely be more conservative then person born to atheist one.
As for institutions , it is part of balancing system. Journalism is mainly liberal. Scientific establishment also. Military is conservative, police also. It is not only naturally kept this way, it is the intention. No one should gain too much power, so it has to have powerful adversaries.
So usualy person in those organizations follows its PC code (consciously or unconsciously) and more likely to take its side.
Problem starts when one side gains more "weight".Too much liberal generals or conservative scientists - not healthy for a society.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
Not always. Person who is born to religious family will more likely be more conservative then person born to atheist one.


My point exactly, family and religion are institutions. They're organized societies with like values. Children are to be taught how to be conservative.

I would like to stay away from phrases like 'not always' because I'm not claiming that, but merely a majority of the time.

[edit on 3/21/2008 by Choronzon]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Choronzon
Without getting into who believes what politically. Why is conservatism always for the most part an instituionalized learned trait?

People aren't born conservative, and half of people stay liberal for a majority of their lives. But it appears that most conservatism is attatched to institutions. (Ex: religion, military, police, fraternities, family, closed socieities like the menanites, etc, etc...).

I'd like to hear your thoughts on Conservatism as a result of Institutionalism.


I have always been conservative since i was born. If anything i have found an undue influence from the establishment to be more liberal or more moderate.

My unadulterated views would be ultra conservative. It is only through the influence of the media and entertainment industries that my views are somewhat watered down.

And yes, conservatism is the preservation and careful reform of institutions because we believe that at the end of the day, civilization is what separates us from animals. You see, if we lose these institutions we lose the real progress that we have made as a species.

Take feral children for example... they act as animals because they arent influenced and cultured by the institutions that we have.

Thus i would say institutionalism is a byproduct of conservative thought processes, not the other way around.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
An institution does not have to be conservative in nature. Liberal institutions such as liberal arts and sciences seem to get along just fine.

Although I do agree that society is integral, I think a persons degree of conservatism is based on their exposure of being institutionalized.

Did you have to goto church as a child? did you goto private school? Was your family heavily conservative? Were you in the military? Are you a member of any fraternities?

[edit on 3/21/2008 by Choronzon]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I'm a paleoconservative, kind of like a libertarian. Goldwater conservative in a sense. I've always really been, and the more I learn about economics and the impact of government policy, the more certain I become in my political beliefs.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
I'm a paleoconservative, kind of like a libertarian. Goldwater conservative in a sense. I've always really been, and the more I learn about economics and the impact of government policy, the more certain I become in my political beliefs.


I would agree fiscal responsibility is probably a naturally occuring process, because we all want our cake and to eat it to.

But I don't mean conservative on one issue, but wholy and entirely a red blood conservative.

[edit on 3/21/2008 by Choronzon]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
I think the mistake is claiming a difference between the two points of view. Both liberals and conservatives appear to want the exact same thing; an outside apparatus such as Government to institutionalize their belief systems whether it is considered liberal or conservative.

Liberals tend to want the government to force people to treat each other the same to the point that some marginalized group in the end gets special treatment. Special treatment can be good or bad.

Conservatives (modern conservatives if you will) tend to want the government to treat certain groups of people in ways that differ from others so that in the end some marginalized group gets special treatment.

Conservatives want a government apparatus that supports "conservative" causes and reduces the freedom of some people while liberals want government apparati that reduce the freedoms of some people under the presumption that it will increase the freedoms of others. The final product is the same.

On the surface a modern liberal in fact seems to want MORE institutionalizaton than the modern conservative. Just take a quick peek at "liberal" causes. Universal Healthcare, Hate Crime Legislation, Affirmative Action, Carbon Caps & Credits, Gun Control, Domestic Spying, The Patriot Act, etc etc. It's all about CONTROL. It's about Government CONTROLLING as much as possible.

Than look at modern conservatism and their "ideas". The Patriot Act, DoHS, never ending war, government interference in our personal lives, Gun Control, Carbon Caps &Credits, Hate Crime Legislation, Domestic spying. It's all about CONTROL. It's about Government CONTROLLING as much as possible.

Funny how many are the same, right?

Liberals praise public schooling which indoctrinates children to socialism and authoritarianism. Conservatives praise religion which indoctirnates children to socialism and authoritarianism (don't argue, read the bible. Jesus was a socialist).

I do not see the difference, either side wants the same thing. A powerful institution, being the Federal Government, to control people who they think have a differing point of view than their chosen side.

In fact, if you do research into either the conservative or liberal sides of the US political system you will come to two conclusions. They all want to take away your freedom and they all will do or say anything to accomplish this.


[edit on 21-3-2008 by Tinhatman]

[edit on 21-3-2008 by Tinhatman]

[edit on 21-3-2008 by Tinhatman]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Choronzon
 


Depends on what you mean by "conservative." True conservatism is the more libertarian side, where I stand mainly. But I'm not a supporter of much of the Republican party because they've taken up something less "conservative." Their support for broad-reaching government powers and government corporations (see: Nixon and the U.S. Postal Service) has alienated those who truly believe in limited government.

Really, neoconservatism, the common slander for these pseudo-conservatives, is a warped, bastard child of conservatism and the corporate socialism the socialists and much of the Democratic party push.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I think Winston Churchill said it best:

"A man who's not a liberal at 20 has no heart, or a conservative by 40 has no brain."

It's easy to be a liberal at 20 when you're young and idealistic. Dear God thats when each and every one of us should be out slaying the dragons of the status quo.

When a man hits those 40's though he has kids and family and bills and a fast approaching retirement to think about. He needs to be more conservative in his affairs.

With the baby boomers just now hitting their retirement years, I worry that the conservatism has only just begun.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Tinhatman
 


You make a good point.

Basically we have a "choice" between an authoritarian left and an authoritarian right, both campaigning for more power over the rest of us.

Left-libertarians and right-libertarians are both mostly disregarded by the major parties, despite the fact that they are probably more representative of the population as a whole.

Look at the efforts the Republicans went to to tear up Ron Paul, who was the only true philosophical conservative (as opposed to the authoritarian right exemplified by Romney) in the race. Or Mike Gravel, whom the Democrats went to great lengths to ignore.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
My area of the south is in the "Bible belt" and church-going is the norm. Here you find people who are conservative through and through, and then you have those who are socially conservative (won't swear, gamble, be overtly sexual, have abortions etc.) but politically liberal, i.e. they support universal health care, programs for the poor, etc. John Edwards is very popular here, a Democrat (formerly a senator from N.C.)who recently was running for president on a platform of advocating for the poor and lower middle class.

In the south it's said if you're Episcopal you're rich and if you're poor you're a Baptist. But here you find many stripes of Baptists and all congregations are not the same. What's the difference in their upbringing? I think it has something to do with level of education (the more education the more liberal one tends to be) and the values of the parents. Mine, for instance, were southerners who were socially conservative but politically liberal. I've rebelled against all their values at one time or another, but politically I still tend to be a little left of center.



posted on Mar, 26 2008 @ 05:51 PM
link   
An interesting Hypothesis.

first off...


(don't argue, read the bible. Jesus was a socialist).


I won't argue, I'll just laugh.


Ok then. If you aren't willing to argue then laughing seems to be an appropriate response.



Why is conservatism always for the most part an instituionalized learned trait?


Because politics is a learned trait, simply. Humans are not innately political. Innately we have to ability to think, use logic (to some extent or another), solve problems, and instinctual abilities of survival. Liberalism is also an institutionalized trait. These could be the same institutions that make people conservative (parents etc) or different institutions (Universities etc).

The reason one would ask such a question is do to ones personal beliefs on the basis for his/her own opinions. Bias in fewer words.

Here is what I see in your question with my own bias [inserted]


Why [does] conservatism [seem to be] an institutionalized learned trait [, to me]?


The answer is that to make such a statement is to be biased. There is nothing wrong with that, but one shouldn't try to deny their own bias.

Conservatism seems to be an institutional trait to you because you see your own bias as innate. Also, "always for the most part" along with being self-defeating is subjective.



In fact, if you do research into either the conservative or liberal sides of the US political system you will come to two conclusions. They all want to take away your freedom and they all will do or say anything to accomplish this.



Besides the whole Jesus thing, I agree with you Tinhatman.

edit: punctuation

[edit on 26-3-2008 by DINSTAAR]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join