How many conservatives does it take to change a lightbulb? Three; one to change the bulb, and two to stand around discussing what a fine old bulb it was.
That makes conservatives sound almost cute and quaint. But they’re not. They’re first of all a bit ironic because the joke above really is about those codgers you know who live in retirement communities with nothing to do but use the Internet spam all their friends with nostalgic crap about the low technology of the good old days when Coke came in bottles, the aesthetics of Bakelite rotary phones, and ‘55 Chevys.
It’s when they want to turn society back(wards) to some addled “better” version of Norman Rockwell America that never was that the issue gets serious, and dangerous. Dangerous because the nostrum of social conservatism sells pretty good in America; it’s not something just for the simpleminded, but it plays very well into the machinations of those who manipulate simple minds for political advantage and economic profit.
We all know and have had conversations with people, even friends and family, who define themselves as “conservatives.” They’re all around us, but you can’t always pick them out by appearance, unless of course they are totally festooned in clothing made up of stars and stripes, or tea bags hanging off a hat or, these days, depending on which state you are in, whether they are packing a 9 mm. in plain sight and staring at you if you are wearing a hoodie. No, you have to wait until they open their mouth and say something––often something stupid that begins with “Rush says . . . ,” or “Jesus hates fags.” Then you know you’ve got yourself the real McCoy, an American social political conservative. By now you know just what I’m talking about because you’ve got at least one friend or a relative who is one. Or, you are one.
If you are one, this is probably going to piss you off. But then again, if you are one, you probably are of that turn of mind that is not going to read further and return to reading your copy of Going Rogue or playing with your guns. Too bad, this might actually help you with that mental process that is not usually associated with the conservative turn of mind––introspection. If not, so long, were going ahead without you.
I have addressed this subject before both directly and in several essays on the subject of mind of George Bush, or in analyses of conservative political and social policy and religious belief. If you have been to these pages and its archives you already know this.
Nevertheless, the conservative mind continues to be a morbid fascination of mine because, particularly in light of the political temperament of American society since the election of Barack Obama, that mind seems to have exposed itself, blatantly and belligerently, more in terms of its ideological rigidities and its malicious mores. But what also prompts my return to the subject is that I am not alone in my prevailing interest. Recently, a couple of academic articles have emerged in academic journals related to the ways in which conservatives think, plumbing the origins of this curious turn of mind.
A lot of the suspicions that many of us have long-held about the character of the conservative mind have long been intuitively apprehensible. Let’s face it we are not talking about a category of very bright, coy people begin with. Witness Mitt Romney, as inauthentic a human being as a cigar store Indian (apologies to native Americans) who utters shifting contradictory political stupidities like a windsock in a hurricane. He managed to beat out Rick Santorum, a sanctimonious jerk, who along with Romney managed to alienate more than half of adult voters with his Taliban like pronouncements. Hopefully we have seen the last Newt Gingrich who fancies himself a “conservative intellectual” (an oxymoron) and impresses hardly anyone beyond the orbit of his Stepford wife/former co-adulterer, espousing moon colonies and, in front of the NRA announcing that, as President, he would pressure the UN to foster world-wide gun ownership. Even The New York Times features columnists such as David Brooks (is he not the poster boy twerp from high school that everyone wanted to kick the shit out of?), or more recently Ross Douthut (pron. “dull thud”), try, laughably, to carry the mantle of “intellectual” conservatism of its patron saint, the late William F Buckley, into land of teabaggers and yahoos.
What accounts for these dunces, politicians and pundits alike, being such mealymouthers and mouthpieces for nasty values? Well, as said above, we have our suspicions, but it is always nice—unless you are one of those who prefers scripture or fantasy to scientific evidence—to get some confirmation from those who have looked at the subject with some empirical rigor. One recent study by social psychologists in Canada found that “Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact.”* Controlling for lower education and socio-economic status the researches found that “lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups.”
The prime descriptive in this statement is authoritarianism. Though certainly not the only personality element characteristic of the conservative mind is almost transcendent in its influence upon ideology and behavior. It is, of course also one of the paradoxical elements in that the strict and demanding obedience to principal and dogma that conservative thought shares with authoritarianism thought nuzzles up closely to very ideologies––for example, communism and Islam––to which conservative ideology is ostensibly opposed.
Authoritarianism, which is intolerant of relativistic positions, also expresses itself in the formation of individual conservative personality characteristics. Anti-gay rights, for example, a prevalent conservative theme, might in fact be a result of highly authoritarian parentage. In a study that was concerned with discovering the extent to which “those individuals who are most hostile toward gays and hold strong anti-gay views may themselves have same-sex desires, albeit undercover ones” further suspicions are confirmed that “. . . prejudice of homophobia may also stem from authoritarian parents, particularly those with homophobic views as well . . .”.
Thus, the psychological basis of American social/political conservatism are rooted in the same ideological soil that nurtures all forms of bigotry and prejudice, a soil of what conservatives fear, or fear of being themselves. In Part 2 of this essay we will address how the twisted minds of conservatives fear women and minorities.
____________________________________________________________
© 2012, James A. Clapp (UrbisMedia Ltd. Pub. 9.11.2012)
*”Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes,” Gordon Hodson and Michael A. Busseri, Psychological Science, February 2012; vol. 23, 2: pp. 187-195.