The results of a recent survey by the Pew Research Center, that conservatives are happier than Liberals shouldn’t be surprising. Liberals know they are unhappy and perhaps dont understand why, and conservatives know they are happy and we can pretty much say just why.
Everyone dislikes liberal interference, but there is way too much generosity when it comes to the analysis of liberalism. Its too painful, or as the liberals might say, offensive. Liberal anger and anxiety make up the chief motivating force in their politics. To keep things stable in liberty is the objective of conservatives.
Let me reduce it all for you to a few concepts.
Simply put, politics is a reflection of world view. All of what we see in the world and react to is a reflection of how we see symbols as friend or foe. Simple. We know this. All we needed was a little reminder.
Icons some of us cherish as traditional and reassuring can and do irk others as obnoxious. Or offensive. Ah, but why?
Because they are mnemonics – symbols – for each of us. Mnemonics are things that trigger memories of something. Association plays a big role, too. For each of us, these symbols remind us of past joy or past pain. Sometimes they have no meaning. With me so far?
It all adds up to why some of us are self-confident, happy, and able to work without a net, while others are angry and forever wounded.
Bashing? Hardly, because most of the differences between the angry and the contented are a perceptual problem, more specifically an inner-experience based problem and not a reality-based problem, not at all. Liberals employ a reality distortion device to stave off anxiety they feel in icons they view as foe. No such anxiety exists for those of us who view societal icons as friend.
The liberal tension or effort is to reduce anxiety these symbols bring out; their effort is to remove their power over the person by political means rather than to remove their power over the person by personal means. Translation: time on the couch in a working-through process.
This explains why liberals interfere with matters that don’t seem to directly concern them, such as removing a cross from a county symbol or imposing education policies on schools where they have no child in school. They are simply irked by the icon which symbolizes for them an old wound that has nothing to do with social justice or much of anything else.
Bashing? More a matter of national survival, when we consider that accommodating such unrelated, pre-adolescent and non-political anger would mean surrender of the nation all for nothing.
If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, then digest this: Think of all of the adversities you suffered as a youth: then think of how you managed them. Did you overcome them or did you dwell on them?
Well, we all dwell on some of them, but those of us who continue to dwell on them grow up to become leftist and those of us who overcome them grow up to work without a net. You might say that liberals never grew up at all and conservatives did. Or put another way, angry people of old wounds choose leftism while more able persons choose conservatism. (Which could explain the double-standard: the angry think of conservatives as adults to be held to a standard and think of themselves still as kids who get away with everything!)
People who overcome their adversities in life, and in fact throughout life, tend to expect it in others, because we know it can be done. It is not an injustice to let people fend for themselves, it is the ultimate respect for their dignity. People who cannot overcome the very same adversities we all suffer tend to try and change out their pain externally, in every venue but where it should be changed. This is the blame others scenario, or the victim mentality, that forever-wounded life.
Why do the angry cheat in stealing archival documents, in lying under oath, in hating capitalism and family, with general underhanded tactics and erasure of history? Because their old wounds still hurt, and their sense of justice is more of trying to soothe an anxiety by legally eliminating social symbols which irk them than one of effecting any positive change. This is why liberals build nothing.
This is where it gets interesting.
The misreads of our society and unending insistence in eroding our society – the indictment that liberals must be out of touch with reality – are based on these old wounds and the anxiety they try to stave off; distortions of reality are erected to avert that anxiety they sense coming again, old, longer-standing anxiety which has little to do with contemporary politics really. This is why the never get better.
You know these simply as defense-mechanisms. Stay with me.
We all have them – we all have excess baggage – but the difference between liberals and conservatives, the difference between the contented and the unhappy, is merely a matter of degree, or how much baggage one is carrying into politics. This is how our values are formed in relation to politics: those of us who are happy know that we preserve our society by rules of fair play and so forth, but when soothing anxiety is the prime pain-avoidance motive over all others, including personal integrity, values go out the window as the anxiety-avoidance becomes the number one motivation for everything.
Well, there you have it, friends.
How we handle liberals is this: now that we understand better the motive of destroying anxiety instead of building a nation, we come to realize that cooperation with people operating on distortions of reality is to surrender the nation all for nothing. You simply can’t think straight when you’re anxious.
Better let the adults handle it, the ones of whom high standards are expected, or so the liberals say in their double standard, remember?
Our battle is still the same as it was in the formation of the nation: merely to keep things stable, to keep things real, opposing destructive change.
And that’s good for the country.