I was reading an article on a psychology magazine about the shift people have towards conservatism in the face of threat. Of course, countries are seldom constantly under threat. Wherein lies the bent towards conservatism?
Naturally, there will always be a mix of conservatives and liberals. It's just the way human diversity works. Some prefer to allow more fluidity in their decision making, others prefer comfortable rules. Nothing wrong with either. The bite comes when a country is in turmoil for some reason, and the people are looking out for a strong leader. If thousands of citizens are dead, the last thing they want to hear is someone saying...well...we should take a balanced view of this, and not be hasty. Not be hasty? Blasphemy! What we need right now is a retaliatory strike against the perpetrators! The first would likely be viewed as a poor leader, or at least a coward. The second would be seen as a strong leader, however ill-advised the move may be. Indeed, it does seem that times of crisis will cause a conservative bent.
However, troubles come when artificial crisis conditions are maintained to maintain support for conservatives. I think that is highly unethical. Who would admit to doing this, anyway? More importantly, need politicians be aware that they are attempting to do this to artificially garner support, or are all things fair in love, war and politics?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment