Conservatives Happier Than Liberals

Totally agreed with the study. The left does tend to be more angry i.e. Christopher Hitchens, Rosie O’Donald, Randi Rhodes, etc.

Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found. Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person’s tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.

The rationalization measure included statements such as: “It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others,” and “This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are.”

news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080507/sc_livescience/conservativeshappierthanliberals

Let’s see… we’re still bleeding money and lives from a war that even if we win it, will strengthen our enemies. The real front against terrorism, in Afghanistan, is neglected and going badly. Inflation is growing. Gas and food prices are up, and we’ve slipped into a recession.

Our standing in the world is the lowest since before WWII. The dollar continues to slide.

Liberals are unhappy; conservatives are happy.

For obvious reasons.

BTW, Libertarians aren’t exactly dancing in the street, either.

Oh brother. I love studies like this, they just add more fuel to polarize people. Personally, I don’t know of many happy conservatives either. I know more than a handful crossing party lines to vote Democratic this year.

The only really “happy” people I know are committed religious people, no matter which faith or where they fall on the political spectrum. I believe it stems from the belief that this stink hole we live in isn’t all there is, and no politician or whacko terrorist will have the last word. When you know this world isn’t your final destination, the future is always bright, there’s always reason for hope, therefore, happiness. :slight_smile: .

In Christ,

Ellen

That’s a good point. I think you have to find happiness within yourself, no matter what else is going on around you. Right now some of the external stuff really stinks but there is more beyond that. Some of the happiest people I’ve encountered are the ones who have the least or have had the hardest lives. They are able to see beyond the shallow and superficial and see what’s important or what’s to come.

Peace,

Personally, I don’t know of many happy conservatives either.

Fewer than there used to be, if the polls are any indication. For most of us, ideology has limits.

Actually, that’s not entirely true. Buddhists aren’t happy, and if they are, they are trying not to be. Their goal is nirvana, which is “nothingness”.

I think I would be very “liberal”, i.e., angry, if I had paid some academic or other to come up with drivel like this.

They obviously had a bias, apparently not considering that “explaining” and “explaining away” inequalities are not the same thing. That’s a value judgment. And what are “inequalities”? Does it mean conservatives don’t care if people starve to death or does it mean liberals do care whether people don’t all drive the same car?

What do they mean by “conservative”. If a person meets another’s definition of “conservative” in one way, does that mean he meets it generally? Or does it take two ways or three?

I don’t think anyone would disagree that Pope Benedict is “conservative” from a theological point of view. Does that, then, mean he rationalizes; that he has that “tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities”?

And one would have to know the writers’ prejudices in order to know what they’re talking about. If they’re a bunch of Bill Ayers’, then the female presidential candidate (and perhaps, but uncertainly, the male one) is a “conservative”. If they’re like Joe Leiberman, then one of the Dem presidential candidates is a “conservative” and the other is a “liberal”. If they’re like Zell Miller, then all Dem candidates, and perhaps the Repub candidate, are “liberals”.

Maybe this is the writers’ attempt to “explain away” the unequal way in which they stereotype conservatives and liberals. If motivated by political anger, are they, then, conservative or liberal, and then who goes on what scale?

It’s just nonsense.

I just love studies determining whether I am happier than someone else.:rolleyes:

Maybe, Jim, if they just let you know at the very first whether your taxes are somehow paying for the study, they could know whether you are happy or unhappy about at least that, without actually having to do the rest of the study.

I’ll bet, one way or another, both you and I did pay for it.:frowning:

But we can both ignore it!:slight_smile: :slight_smile:

Well, explain Micheal Savage then.

I read the Daily Kos everyday. Maybe reading too many rants against Bush and the Republicans makes one angry.

This isn’t the first controversial study I encountered… I recently read “Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition”

wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf

I also remember reading a book by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray and I come to the conclusion that some people do not have the mental ability to prosper in the world and they need a managerial state to assist them. Liberals in particular did not like that book.

This makes sense when you look at it through the political party prism.

Think about it…The whole point of being a Democrat is to hope for doom…

  1. The war in Iraq- If it’s deemed succesful Dems lose.

  2. Race relations–If they are giong well Dems lose.

  3. Prosperity–If more Americans have it Dems lose.

  4. Health- If more people are healthy-Dems lose.

  5. That the world is going to die off due to Global Warming- If people accept this Dems win.

The study is bogus. I’m a leftwinger and I’m happy. I stay happy by ignoring the rightwingers.

If you are a left-winger, why don’t you read the Daily Kos. Many left-wingers do that.

I think it is rather obvious that there will be angry people on both sides. It just appears to some that there are more angry left-wingers. I tend to agree.

I wouldn’t say it is bogus because you’re happy. I do not think the study says that there are no happy left-wingers, only that there are fewer happy people on the left than on the right.

Ribozyme, I think I shall ignore you. Your beliefs, to me, are disturbing. I hope you never become president, because I’d hate to see you with a loaded, cobalt-salted ICBM. That you think that humanity should become extinct is extremely distressing, that your type exists is even more disturbing.

The study is still a stupid waste of money. How do they measure anyone’s happiness?:rolleyes:

Forgive him. He is young and “idealistic”. Hopefully he will learn as he matures.

Wow that’s amazing! I guess it just goes to show that God rewards those who are on His side. :stuck_out_tongue: That said, there is a couple of right wing things that I disagree with such as going to war with nations just to solve problems that could be solved otherwise and the death penalty. Most right wingers are for the death penalty. I am totally against it. However, I do still consider myself to be a right winger.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.