Furthest Right

Why Conservatives Were More Willing To Break Lockdown

We enter into weird days now where the Left encourages us to obey quarantine recommendations simply because the Left is in control, but losing control as its policies fail, so it wants to seize final control through a transition to socialism, one world government, and diversity.

If we all stay hunkered down in our homes until 2021 as they suggest, the world economy will cease to exist, and our only possibility of survival will consist of something like Communism, where a militarized world government oversees distribution of resources.

This appeals to the Leftist mindset which above all else fears having a lower social status than others. To this end, they developed “equality,” a symbolic mindset translated into policy (a.k.a. an ideology) which insists that everyone get treated exactly the same.

That appeals to people who believe, rightfully or not, that in an honest competition for contribution or production, they will not be able to participate because they have nothing to offer. This explains why the Left is a menagerie of box wine aunts, soyboys, minorities, homosexuals, abused children, drug addicts, religious fanatics, and neurotics.

When they see a slave or a poor person, they see themselves in that role, because they fundamentally believe that life is bad and that the reason they are unimportant therefore must be because the bad life has discriminated against them.

In reality, baristas and entry-level tech workers are just not that important. If one gets run over by a steamroller, you just find another; their skills are not finely-tuned enough to distinguish good from bad, barring really grotesque dereliction of duty or crime.

Since they see life as bad, they fear any risk or threat of death because those are in their view the methods of life unless humans intervene and create equality-Utopia. They do not understand the conservative view, which accepts risk and certainty of death as conditions of life.

Consider an analysis of conservative attitudes toward risk:

Using an American sample of community adults (n = 397), we investigated when conservatives and liberals might be risk-taking or risk-averse. Participants completed measures of political orientation, and perceptions of risk, expected benefits (EB) of risk, and risk-propensity, across five domains (financial, recreational, ethical, social, and health). The relation between perceptions of risk and EB and risk-propensity differed as a function of political conservatism and varied across risk domains. For example, with regard to new business ventures, conservatives were generally willing to take risks unless perceived risk was high and expected benefit was low, whereas liberals were generally unwilling to take risks unless perceived risk was low and expected benefit was high.

In other words, while conservatives tend to favor time-honored solutions, this is not out of fear but out of recognition of likely success; they are more concerned with what can be acquired by a transaction than whether it contains risk.

Leftists, on the other hand, are risk-averse, so situations which do not involve guaranteed delivery of something, even if minimal, scare them. Capitalism scares them; some win, others less so. Natural selection scares them. Hierarchy terrifies them. For that reason, so do social standards.

Conservatives looking at the coronavirus saw a threat that was not certain. Not all who got it died, and many who got it had mild cases. As a result, conservatives found themselves more concerned with acquiring normal life than running away from the disease.

Tags: , , , , ,

Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn