A serious look at Conservative and Liberal mindsets | Eastern North Carolina Now

    A serious look at Conservative and Liberal mindsets

    I usually try to find the humorous side of almost everything.

   It is a trait or technique formed by finding myself in situations beyond my control. That is why the majority of my post and comments include some form of humor.

    Life is not a natural progression along a preplanned path with rest stops along the way. Sometimes, it is a peaceful journey through wonderland and at others, it is a minefield dash with no clue where the mines are buried.

    For most people, their beliefs and philosophies are based on the sum total of their life experiences. Back in the 1970 there was a sociologist who propagated the theory that "What You Are Is Where You Were When". His name was Morris Massey (1). The general premise of his work was that there are three stages in the development: His theory was that as you age you are influenced by society at different levels.

    1. The Imprint Period.

    2. The Modeling Period.

    3. The Socialization Period.

    By the time you are an adult most of your beliefs are fixed and only a Significant Emotional Event will cause you to make a dramatic change. For the rest of your life you will see the world through the prism of your belief system. A "SEE" can be death, traumatic injury, job loss, or any number of things that shake you to your foundation and make you re-evaluate your beliefs.

    Like most good professors and educators, Morris went on to refine and regurgitate his theories ad nauseam. He published books, training materials, video tapes and lectures hitting that same nail over and over again.

    That does not detract from the idea that he may have hit onto something with is initial theory. After all, he did what any good Capitalist would do. He proceeded to monetize his theories. I find no fault with that and am grateful for the initial insight.

    Using that theory as a foundation, I tried to examine the differences between the broad social terms of conservative and liberal. I am not talking about the political divide or the group mentality of the separate groups.

    It is not important to have empathy toward people of different beliefs if you are trying to understand them. It is however, important to have consideration for their viewpoint. In the art of persuasion, it is not necessarily the logic of your argument that wins the day but the depth of your conviction.

    That brings me to what I see as the basic difference in a liberal or conservative mindset. I will try to refrain from slanting my analysis one way or the other. But in order to clarify my viewpoint, I must state that I have a basic belief in immutable principles and the freedom for each person to have their own beliefs without interference from government as long as their beliefs and actions do not interfere with my right to have my own beliefs. For most that would make me a conservative. But here goes:

    I believe that the human brain is hard wired from birth to make certain electrical or chemical connections without thought. Like all animals in nature, there is a survival instinct that does not require reason or thought. It is a basic reaction to stimulus. A physiologist would call it a cognitive bias. In its most simple of terms, it is a fight of flight reaction.

    The Conservative:

    A conservative mindset puts a premium on what has worked before and tends to put a premium on past successes. They do not feel the need to examine every thought or circumstance to decide on a course of action. When confronted with a circumstance that does not readily fit their autopilot, they will examine and make decisions on the next course of action.

    The Liberal:

    A liberal mindset puts a premium on analysis and reflection and tends to put a premium on analysis. They do feel the need to examine every thought and circumstance to understand the why and wherefore before deciding on a course of action. When confronted with a circumstance that does is not readily solved with rational thought they will make decisions based on their autopilot.

    I realize that this is an oversimplification of the subject.

    Both sides have the unique human trait of wanting to associate themselves with people of like mind or like experiences or interest. Both sides seem to have the passion to convert others to their way of thinking. Both sides have the ability to abuse a system to force the others to adhere to their standards. Both sides can rise to the level of superiority to the point that they resort to force to prevent the other side from differing with their mindset.

    Fortunately, the founders of the United States of America were composed of both sides of the mental road. Nevertheless, they were able to agree on the basic principles that all men had the right to live their life as they saw fit. Back in the day that did not include women and slaves but the ideal was there. They were acutely aware that implementation of those ideals would be imperfect and flawed because that is the common trait of mankind.

    They constructed a system based on the individual rights of each member and the respect of law rather than the vote of the majority. To keep things simple they established a list of "RIGHTS" they could all agree on. It took a good bit of back and forth debate on just how many and what the "RIGHTS" were. Beyond those enumerated "RIGHTS" people were pretty much free to do as they pleased.

    They also constructed a system which they hoped would make the governing slow and methodical in hopes that the passions of the moment could be tempered by both rational thought and instinct.

    But, human nature being what it is, they were fully aware that there would be no perfect solution or utopia in this life or on this earth. For this reason they had a hope that the least control of others by the government was the best course. We did not expect our leaders to know the twist and turns of the every trail. We did expect them to point to the mountaintop and influence enough people that the journey was worth the effort.

    The experiment has been going on for over two hundred years. We have veered off course many times and have often forgotten the mountaintop in pursuit of the perfect trail. It does not exist. There are hills, valleys, rivers, predators and all manner of obstacles along the way.

    Sometimes our duly elected leaders will lose their way while looking down for the pitfalls instead of up for the mountaintop. That is human nature as well.

    I have no expectations that this post or any post will change the debate or reach a conclusion satisfactory to the palate of the diners. I do believe that there are enough cooks in the kitchen to stir the pot but not enough connoisseurs to create the feast.

    I believe we got off base when we found that we could pass laws, levy taxes that generally ignore the "Rule of Law" and sink into the majority rules over the minority opinions.

    It took fourteen years for all the colonies to ratify the constitution (2). The evolution or creation of good things takes time and gives room for contemplation. Only God could create the world in the metaphorical seven days.

    It took one hundred and seventy four years for a troubadour to pen the lyrics to a song that sums up the debate.

    It's a restless hungry feeling
    That don't mean no one no good
    When ev'rything I'm a-sayin'
    You can say it just as good.

    You're right from your side
    I'm right from mine
    We're both just one too many mornings
    An' a thousand miles behind
    Bob Dylan 1964 (3)

    Links:

    1 Who is Morris Massey?:

    2 Ratification of the Constitution:

    3 Bob Dylan -One Too Many Mornings:

    "Comments on this post have been disabled because a reasoned and opposite view deserves its own forum. Feel free to write and submit a post. It will add to the debate without deteriorating into a slugfest".