Moving to the Right - What Causes It? - Mo's Journal — LiveJournal
Moving to the Right - What Causes It?|
There's a Nicaraguan joke about a Sandinista orator whipping up the crowd: "The man who has two houses, we'll take away one house and give it to the man who has no house!" "Viva la Revolucion!" "The man who has two cars, we take one away and give it to the man who has no car!" "Viva la Revolucion!" "The man who has two chickens, we take one away and give it to the man who has no chicken!" Dead silence, until someone pipes up, "I HAVE two chickens!"
Yes, that's what I was going to say--there's a lot of selfishness in people, and as folks get older and have more property (and more dependents a lot of times whose future they may want to protect), many get more conservative.
I sometimes think of it as focus narrowing, i.e., whereas for young people change often needs to occur globally or at least nationally, the older people get, the more they seem to focus on their neighborhood/city/state... So they may fight for their schools getting better but don't care about those in the next state, because that's not where their kids are...
It's like this friend of mine who bought an SUV to protect *her* kids...forget about what it may do to the environment of other people's kids...
I actually think we may have to separate between economic and social liberal/conservativism. I think the latter may very well be affected strongly by what artaxastra talks about--you may be liberal for your coming of age decade but at some point your goals are achieved and the new ones may be just a tad too extreme...but economically, it's executrix's point and the selfishness...
If you're not a Communist at 20, you have no heart; if you're still one at 30, no brain, used to be my dad's favorite saying. And boy, dis he make that shift from marching in the sixties to golf playing physician in the eighties...
Two things might happen with age:
1. We have more possessions and therefore become paranoid about protecting them.
2. We have children and become protective.
Both of these things, in the absence of study and analysis, can be dangerous. Without the ability to decode and learn from history, we're more likely to as politicians and police to help make us feel safe.
Oh yeah, and the greed thing. When you make more money, you pay more taxes and use fewer of the social services.
LOL. Yes...that's what I was trying to say in my rambling tl;dr :)
Thanks for bringing it to an easy point. (And again, I think that goes more for economic than social values--however, the kids bring in social issues as well...not even necessarily in terms of your own changing, but more in terms of being less independent, bc while you may easily withstand peer pressure, you might want to protect your kids from suffering from your beliefs)
|Date:||April 8th, 2008 03:52 pm (UTC)|| |
I have found that parenting has made me more socially conscious and socially responsible, and consequently more progressive. All because I want to be a good example for my children.
Hence my words about "ability to decode and learn from history". You also have a protective instinct for your children but you have a more complex idea of things that they need. You're not going to be the one that says, "I need a gun in my house to protect my children!!!!!"
|Date:||April 8th, 2008 07:31 pm (UTC)|| |
"You're not going to be the one that says, "I need a gun in my house to protect my children!!!!!"
LOL! Yeah, not bloody likely. But I don't know that that comes from a more complex idea of things so much as an ability to look at simple math and simple statistics. Children in houses with guns are much more likely to be shot than children in houses without guns.
Complexity and simplicity are two sides of the same coin. Real education teaches us to break things down into simple component pieces and to understand those pieces so we can reconstruct a meaningful, complex whole.
Following a subway shooting in Toronto last week, some are calling for transit security to be armed. Yeah, that will prevent shooting injuries!
One woman left a message on a CBC show saying that arming them was good because "there are more panhandlers on the subway cars now". I don't think she was doing the math...
|Date:||April 8th, 2008 07:58 pm (UTC)|| |
LOL! And to tie this in with my comment elsewhere, if one's social circle narrows to the point where the only people one associates with also think more guns on public transit leads to fewer injuries from guns on public transit, it may be harder to notice the flaw in one's thinking.
I wonder to what extent a lot of this is sparked by Helen's number 8 below.
IAWTC. I've actually become more active about liberal stances (which haven't changed) in order to set a good example for them.
Edited at 2008-04-12 04:38 pm (UTC)
|Date:||April 12th, 2008 06:26 pm (UTC)|| |
Glad I'm not the only one. What does IAWTC mean? I get stuck after "I am"
I Agree With That(this) Comment. IAWTC. I'm not much for 'netspeak' but that is one of a few that I use. ;D
|Date:||April 13th, 2008 02:32 am (UTC)|| |
Aha! And I - who use a lot of 'net abbreviations - didn't get it.
I recently heard about a guy who was kind of a newbie but he had - he thought - picked up some of the netspeak from his kids texting him. Only he thought that LOL meant "lots of love" and he started using it in totally inappropriate ways, like "Sorry to hear your father died LOL."