Conservatism from a psychological viewpoint

This is an important article by George Lakoff, a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley.
I hope you can take the time to read it, because he has an excellent grasp of what makes a conservative from a cognitive point of view. Keep in mind, it was written before the election but is as relevant today as then.
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/38601-understanding-trump
I agree with almost everything he says about conservatism. I think he has the right answer to what drives conservative politics and the people who embrace it.
Here is an excerpt that reveals of Lakoff’s basic analysis.
“In the strict father family, father knows best. He knows right from wrong and has the ultimate authority to make sure his children and his spouse do what he says, which is taken to be what is right. Many conservative spouses accept this worldview, uphold the father’s authority, and are strict in those realms of family life that they are in charge of. When his children disobey, it is his moral duty to punish them painfully enough so that, to avoid punishment, they will obey him (do what is right) and not just do what feels good. Through physical discipline they are supposed to become disciplined, internally strong, and able to prosper in the external world. What if they don’t prosper? That means they are not disciplined, and therefore cannot be moral, and so deserve their poverty. This reasoning shows up in conservative politics in which the poor are seen as lazy and undeserving, and the rich as deserving their wealth. Responsibility is thus taken to be personal responsibility not social responsibility. What you become is only up to you; society has nothing to do with it. You are responsible for yourself, not for others — who are responsible for themselves.”
The one thing I disagree with is Lakoff’s view of Trump’s stand on women’s choice and Planned Parenthood, however. I have never heard Trump say he supports either and as a strong patriarchal family conservative he is unlikely to support women having that much influence over iron-fisted male control.
L

Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure.
His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.

This is an important article by George Lakoff, a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley. I hope you can take the time to read it, because he has an excellent grasp of what makes a conservative from a cognitive point of view. Keep in mind, it was written before the election but is as relevant today as then. http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/38601-understanding-trump I agree with almost everything he says about conservatism. I think he has the right answer to what drives conservative politics and the people who embrace it. Here is an excerpt that reveals of Lakoff's basic analysis. "In the strict father family, father knows best. He knows right from wrong and has the ultimate authority to make sure his children and his spouse do what he says, which is taken to be what is right. Many conservative spouses accept this worldview, uphold the father’s authority, and are strict in those realms of family life that they are in charge of. When his children disobey, it is his moral duty to punish them painfully enough so that, to avoid punishment, they will obey him (do what is right) and not just do what feels good. Through physical discipline they are supposed to become disciplined, internally strong, and able to prosper in the external world. What if they don’t prosper? That means they are not disciplined, and therefore cannot be moral, and so deserve their poverty. This reasoning shows up in conservative politics in which the poor are seen as lazy and undeserving, and the rich as deserving their wealth. Responsibility is thus taken to be personal responsibility not social responsibility. What you become is only up to you; society has nothing to do with it. You are responsible for yourself, not for others — who are responsible for themselves." The one thing I disagree with is Lakoff's view of Trump's stand on women's choice and Planned Parenthood, however. I have never heard Trump say he supports either and as a strong patriarchal family conservative he is unlikely to support women having that much influence over iron-fisted male control. L
I think that sums it up perfectly, though I suspect most of us on this forum knew as much. I'd add one thing...and they like their women to be like Barbie dolls.

Good article. Makes a lot of sense and well worth reading. Thank you Lois.

Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election.
Definitely not. He wrote it before the election. :-)
Good article. Makes a lot of sense and well worth reading. Thank you Lois.
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election.
Definitely not. He wrote it before the election. :-)
Thanks for pointing that out. Glad the election is over.
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up.
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up. You got that wrong. I fully understand Trump won the Republican nomination. But he won on Trump’s ideas and thinking. Not the ideas and thinking of the Republican Party at the time he first started to run. Where were you during the election? The Republican Party did not want Trump to win the nomination. Did you miss the “Never Trump" or the “Stop Trump" movements? Trump even talked about running in a third party because of the Republican Parties dislike for him. The Republican Party and the Republican members were not on the same page and Trump ended up getting 90% of the GOP vote. You had a little of that going on in the Democratic Party too. In this Times article they talk about what went on during the election. Notice that they see it as Trump’s programs and thinking and not the Republican Parties. Yet on the Democratic side, they use “Democratic Party" and not Hillary. The only talk about Hillary is how she represented the wealthy. Conversely, the Republican electorate, egged on by Donald Trump, has flipped. As recently as March 2014, before anyone gave a thought to a Trump presidential bid, Pew found that Republican voters were solidly in the free trade camp, 55-36. By October 2016, Republican voters had become decisively anti-trade, 68-24. If anything, Trump’s adamant opposition to free trade agreements and his call for the adoption of protectionist tax and tariff policies, are likely to push Democratic voters who oppose Trump to shift even further in favor of trade. Although Trump’s protectionist proposals to deal with trade and outsourcing could prove disastrous to economic growth over time, he has offered the business community carrots (tax breaks and contracts) and sticks (tariffs and tax penalties) that have for the moment stifled industry opposition and allowed Trump to win over millions of voters. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/opinion/one-problem-for-democratic-leaders-is-democratic-voters.html?_r=0
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up. You can simply look at the numbers to know that is right Lois. The figures were in the 80 and 90% range that people who always voted Republican or Democrat, just did what they always did. That is how a two party system works. Consequently, we are beholden to 10 or 20% or electorate which is 5 or 10% of the population eligible to vote, not to mention the disenfranchised. It's a screwed up system. Too complicated for people like Mike to comprehend.
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up. You can simply look at the numbers to know that is right Lois. The figures were in the 80 and 90% range that people who always voted Republican or Democrat, just did what they always did. That is how a two party system works. Consequently, we are beholden to 10 or 20% or electorate which is 5 or 10% of the population eligible to vote, not to mention the disenfranchised. It's a screwed up system. Too complicated for people like Mike to comprehend. Is that the best you can do? You’re dumb, you’re stupid. That’s your psychological view point? Sounds to me like you are in total denial and want to blame it on simple party affiliation. It is a fact money wins elections. 91% of the time the candidate that spends the most money wins. And Hillary spent almost twice as much as Trump. A lock to win by simplicity viewpoints.

Lois I went to YouTube and found this interview for a couple week ago. I’ve just started listening to it, we’ll see.
I don’t know Carol Rosin, wasn’t impressed with her introduction.
He’s got one hell of a description.

Exclusive: How Trump Won & How All Can Win-Win Now! Dr. George Lakoff On The Carol Rosin Show American Freedom Radio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drP9WRcaCO4 Published on Dec 9, 2016 WORDS, METAPHORS, FRAMES & BRAINS! Dr. George Lakoff on The Carol Rosin Show. Professor Emeritus Dr. George Lakoff, one of the most world renowned experts in linguists and a Cognitive Scientist, and author of many books including the international best-seller, 'THE ALL NEW DON"T THINK OF AN ELEPHANT,' presents vitally important information in a brilliant interview based on his decades of his scholarly work and experiences to help us understand how our neural circuits, our brain and mind work, and what we need to understand to create new resulting from the election of President Donald Trump. Dr. Lakoff will explain how words, metaphors, and framing were used in this election, how voters were influenced, and it’s not what most think happened. Here is what we need to learn and do now to move with tools he suggests. Dr. Lakoff describes characteristics of conservatives, moderates, liberals and progressives…including in terms of how their brains and minds work. Lakoff addresses, for example, military training programs and how military people are taught to think…about trust or distrust…and what are the factors relating to current models of “domination and control" that are profoundly important in the context of a most important understanding of the detailed differences, similarities and complexities among conservatives, moderates, liberals, and progressives he presents. And how can WE now can influence decision makers and WIN! He shows how it was done and what failed, too, in this 2016 US presidential election! Metaphors, framing, words…and neural circuits…how the brain and mind work in a variety of situations and cultures, and how voters & decisions can get easily manipulated, dominated and controlled…systematically. Lakoff begins to give us some of the cognitive and other tools we need to move forward. Lakoff has written huge numbers of papers and many books including, “Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think," “The Political Mind," “Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things," and “Whose Freedom: The Battle Over America’s Most Important Idea." He has worked with hundreds of advocacy groups, Democratic caucuses in the US House & Senate, and spoken worldwide to large audiences and media. He has taught at Harvard, U. of Michigan, was a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences at Stanford, was co-director of the Neural Theory of Language Project at the International Computer Science Institute at Berkeley, served on the international Advisory Board of Prime Minister Zapatro in Spain, has served on the science board of the Sante Fe Institute as President of the International Cognitive Linguistics Association and on the governing board of the Cognitive Science Society. Lakoff is one of the most cited American scholars with more than 130,000 citations in scholarly journals. This theoretical and technical interview fits our time…a new beginning IF we get this. It’s about what’s happened, and can. Brilliant, timely, and relevant to our earthBOUND ways & Space Age thoughts & actions, teachings & lessons, & to decisions and how to influence them! (PS. While he describes himself as a Progressive, Dr. Lakoff said he would like to be invited into Conservative media, too.) Contact: George Lakoff http://georgelakoff.com
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up. You got that wrong. I fully understand Trump won the Republican nomination. But he won on Trump’s ideas and thinking. Not the ideas and thinking of the Republican Party at the time he first started to run. Where were you during the election? The Republican Party did not want Trump to win the nomination. Did you miss the “Never Trump" or the “Stop Trump" movements? Trump even talked about running in a third party because of the Republican Parties dislike for him. The Republican Party and the Republican members were not on the same page and Trump ended up getting 90% of the GOP vote. You had a little of that going on in the Democratic Party too. In this Times article they talk about what went on during the election. Notice that they see it as Trump’s programs and thinking and not the Republican Parties. Yet on the Democratic side, they use “Democratic Party" and not Hillary. The only talk about Hillary is how she represented the wealthy. Conversely, the Republican electorate, egged on by Donald Trump, has flipped. As recently as March 2014, before anyone gave a thought to a Trump presidential bid, Pew found that Republican voters were solidly in the free trade camp, 55-36. By October 2016, Republican voters had become decisively anti-trade, 68-24. If anything, Trump’s adamant opposition to free trade agreements and his call for the adoption of protectionist tax and tariff policies, are likely to push Democratic voters who oppose Trump to shift even further in favor of trade. Although Trump’s protectionist proposals to deal with trade and outsourcing could prove disastrous to economic growth over time, he has offered the business community carrots (tax breaks and contracts) and sticks (tariffs and tax penalties) that have for the moment stifled industry opposition and allowed Trump to win over millions of voters. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/opinion/one-problem-for-democratic-leaders-is-democratic-voters.html?_r=0 The party capitulated. They fell over like a stack of empty boxes. That's Republicans for you.
The party capitulated. They fell over like a stack of empty boxes. That’s Republicans for you.
They want only to win at all costs. If it ruins the country and destroys the Constitution, they could care less. One can can complain all one wants about the Democrats, but at least they try to do things that are good and to the benefit of the general public. The Republican Party's only concern is to promote their own power and that of the wealthy patrons who own them (aka the Cock brothers, the NRA, the Religious Right, the coal industry, etc.).
Defiantly a left thinker trying to figure out what happened in the election. Thinks the people voted for Trump because Trump represents a “father figure". I think it was quite the opposite. It was Hillary in my view that was being portrayed as a matriarch figure. His views on the unions are not correct for today’s unions. What I do agree with him is the Democrats were pandering the different voting groups. And that Trump did not fit the Republican mold. I think you would have to say that Trump won the election and not the Republican Party. People cannot seem to grasp that concept.
It was also the Republican party that won the election. It's people like you who can't grasp the concept that Trump ran as a Republican and won as a Republican. The vast majority of his supporters are patriarchal Republicans. You can't separate them now because it's convenient to your preconceived ideas. Get over it. Grow up. You got that wrong. I fully understand Trump won the Republican nomination. But he won on Trump’s ideas and thinking. Not the ideas and thinking of the Republican Party at the time he first started to run. Where were you during the election? The Republican Party did not want Trump to win the nomination. Did you miss the “Never Trump" or the “Stop Trump" movements? Trump even talked about running in a third party because of the Republican Parties dislike for him. The Republican Party and the Republican members were not on the same page and Trump ended up getting 90% of the GOP vote. You had a little of that going on in the Democratic Party too. In this Times article they talk about what went on during the election. Notice that they see it as Trump’s programs and thinking and not the Republican Parties. Yet on the Democratic side, they use “Democratic Party" and not Hillary. The only talk about Hillary is how she represented the wealthy. Conversely, the Republican electorate, egged on by Donald Trump, has flipped. As recently as March 2014, before anyone gave a thought to a Trump presidential bid, Pew found that Republican voters were solidly in the free trade camp, 55-36. By October 2016, Republican voters had become decisively anti-trade, 68-24. If anything, Trump’s adamant opposition to free trade agreements and his call for the adoption of protectionist tax and tariff policies, are likely to push Democratic voters who oppose Trump to shift even further in favor of trade. Although Trump’s protectionist proposals to deal with trade and outsourcing could prove disastrous to economic growth over time, he has offered the business community carrots (tax breaks and contracts) and sticks (tariffs and tax penalties) that have for the moment stifled industry opposition and allowed Trump to win over millions of voters. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/opinion/one-problem-for-democratic-leaders-is-democratic-voters.html?_r=0 Sure they said NEVER TRUMP. The minute he won the nomination all the Republicans fell into line like ducks in a shooting gallery. Even the people he insulted started supporting him and his outrageous, destructive positions. It shows they can't think for themselves. They can only slavishly follow. You are apparently one of them. A boot-licker.