Your politics is your psychology

[sexobon]

The Cellar: Politics is music to our ears.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by sexobon

The Cellar: Politics is music to our ears.

you're awesome, man.

***

http://www.cracked.com/article_19402...n-america.html

just what the link says. About as coherent as the TED talk, but with half the pretension.

[Lamplighter]

In the OP, UT took a very personal view of the way psychology influences a person's politics.
For some, maybe they can identify the personal influences
(or lack thereof) that lead to their current politics.

But I can't. I had a very calm, nondescript childhood.
There were no family catastrophes, no extreme poverty or wealth,
just run-of-the-mill working parents.
So, why am I a flaming, bleeding-heart, liberal ?

I think it's because of phenomena described in a book titled "Generations"
by W.Strauss and N.Howe, published back in 1991.
It's subtitle is "The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069"

In it, a generation is about 22 years, and the authors identify and name 20 periods
of American history, starting with the "Puritan " generation born between 1584-1614.
The authors describe four life periods as Childhood, Rising, Midlife, and Elder
for ages up to 21, 43, 61 and 87, respectively.
When the generations are plotted graphed against time as they move
through the four life periods, the authors refer to it as "generational diagonals".

So far, nothing unusual...
We frequently use "Babyboomer", "Gen X" and "Millennial" to describe our present generations,
and easily recognize natural periods of youth, adult, midlife, and elderly.

What makes Generations unique are three new concepts of what
might be called a cohort psychology.
First, the authors classified all 20 generations into one of 4 types,
named "Idealist", "Reactive", "Civic", and "Adaptive".
Second, and what is remarkable, is these 4 types fall into a chronological cycle,
that has been repeated 5 times through American history.
Third, and most important, the authors describe the interactions between
the living generations as they move through their generational diagonal.

My age group was named the "Silent" generation.
I followed the "G.I." generation and lead the "Boomers" through all phases of my life.
The factors that influenced this SILENT cohort are quite accurately described (p 279-294).
- the vigor and civic activities of the WWII vets (FHA, GI bill, labor unions, etc.)
- the improvements of incomes as farm families become suburban homeowners
- the advancements of science, such as from life-threatening asthma to healthy adulthood
- the "pill" and the subsequent sexual revolution, and decline in the control by religions
- the politics, faith, and desires to improve society through better government
- the civil rights movement and the rejection of the biases of our parents

I do think these are what contributed to me becoming a proud and flaming liberal.

[B-Tay]

This issue seems basic, but I cannot help but think the individual is born with a way of thinking that will overcome the childhood imprints of the parent.

Up to my late teens, I tended to blindly parrot my father's views, because I considered him quite brilliant. (Mom is alive and everything but she is not too much into politics or sports, so my identification with her is more of the nurturer only). But things changed for no clear reason (other than maturity) and I would attribute that to my personal way of thinking, which is a lot more anxious and a need for clarity at all times, whereas he is VERY quiet, and would find the "thinking stuff" to be a waste of time which would detract from his reading. He reads constantly, and is not a very social person at all (he is a retired mechanical engineer).

Thus I know I tend to "think" more than my father. I have diverged from him on politics and other issues. We are not opposites, but I know he is sort of stuck in a traditional north Texas democrat/Ann Richards/Molly Ivins type of role, and I keep changing my views as I become more open-minded to things that I was taught were "nutty" - for example "Goldwater was a nut" was what I was brought up to believe. Now I find him to be over-principled, but not nutty at all. He fits a logic that is understandable.

At this stage I like to bandy things about in my head and see if there is a logic that is understandable. Even something like abortion I can easily see both sides. I tend to view a lot of things in shades of gray so I tend to not really engage in many discussions. I recently found myself at a dinner party and debating politics with someone and very much enjoyed it, because we were both quite adept at keeping things unemotional and intelligent.

Also, having two of my own children really hit home with me how little I influence certain ways of thinking with them. Sure I can influence certain, obvious things, and I am sure they too will follow my line of thinking at first, but I definitely see how they react and interpret life is something that they were born with, so their politics naturally will evolve depending on their innate outlook.

The red wine is wearing off. Time to hit the sack.

[pastortoy]

Originally Posted by B-Tay

Thus I know I tend to "think" more than my father.

Originally Posted by B-Tay

Also, having two of my own children really hit home with me how little I influence certain ways of thinking with them.

It's genetic.