You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Culture Wars
Ken Schram Commentary: Just Born The 'Right' Way?
2005-06-22
Via LGF:
Oooh! Look! It's an Ed Anger of the left! He's pig-bitin' mad, and he ain't gonna toake it no more!
According to a new study published in the American Political Science Review, being politically conservative is, in part, a matter or genetics.
Well, that makes sense. If a child's parents are intelligent, good-looking, morally sound, and all that sort of stuff, then you can expect the child to be, too... Oh. That's not what he meant, is it?
I’ve long wondered how an otherwise seemingly rational person could adhere so strictly to stilted ideologies; how they could be so consistently willing to smother a sense of social well-being.
Which sort of "stilted ideologies"? Political conservatism has many strains, running from the libertarian through the paleoconservative. We have no single set of books — like Das Kapital or the Communist Manifesto — that establish our dogma. Pretty much across the board, conservatives of all stripes revere cause and effect, balancing costs with benefits, the laws of probability, rules that apply to everyone, and even logic.
It’s merely a matter of having been dumped in the shallow end of the gene pool. They’re sorta like the puppy who piddles in the middle of the floor: They just don’t know any better.
Oh, I dunno. It's also a matter of age and experience for many of us. When I was a young fellow, I was close to being a socialist. There were many problems in this world, by Gad, and government should address them all. At once! People were suffering, dammit! It was government's responsibility to alleviate poverty, make sure people were treated the same, to ensure that cars were safe, and even to define "safe." Of course, when I was somewhat younger than that, I used to poop in my diaper. Thankfully, with the passage of years, I've outgrown both.
To be sure, the study says that how someone is raised may determine their political party affiliation, but it’s genetics that appears to set one on a philosophically conservative course. To me, that helps explain why PBS threatens their intellect, or why they are so at peace with going to war.
There's no threat to my intellect from PBS. PBS tends to bore me to tears. I don't think I've watched it in five years, at least, and even before that only briefly. And I'm at peace with going to war because I pay attention, unlike some residents of Seattle.
It’s not that conservatives mean to favor the rich over the poor and middle class. And it’s not that they’d rather drill for oil than preserve the environment. Because it’s not really their fault. They’re just born that way.
It might be that many who're conservative used to be poor and have now achieved some sort of middle class stability. It might be that many are in the process of achieving that middle class stability and like the idea of the rules not being changed out from under them, and the idea of once they achieve some sort of economic stability that it won't be snatched away from them and given to somebody else.
And

More on this genetic pseudo-validation of the far left’s superiority complex, at (where else?) the New York Times: Some Politics May Be Etched in the Genes.
Posted by:anonymous2u

#22  so.....

if my politics are genetically determined then I cant be blamed for them, since Im not really responsible for them... to paraphrase the argument on sexuality that the left likes to use.
Posted by: Frank Martin   2005-06-22 18:15  

#21  Like many I started left - but...
Carter's little 28% interest rates destroyed my entry into the job market.
His dealing with the Shah and replacing him with a worse monster then pouting in the rose garden appalled me.
And I have to say it...
At the time I said that supporting Islam against the Russians in Afganistan would come back to bite us. It was a good 1 term policy but an awful long term one.

Never voted dem again.
Majority republican
Sometimes I vote for other parties
Sometimes I just write in Mickey Mouse
Once - anybody but the incumbent.

Oh and I don't know why Kerry bragged about his IQ and SAT. A president should be much smarter!
Posted by: 3dc   2005-06-22 18:06  

#20  Actually, in a way, the genetics argument is true. I was a socialist until a pair of pretty brown eyes came along.
Posted by: badanov   2005-06-22 17:42  

#19  Dr. Spook! I love it! And d@mn it, Old Spook, I only scored 1270 on SAT. Like the cowboy doing better at Yale than sKerry, methinks that Kenny is, oh, what do those psycho-babble call it? Oh yeah, PROJECTION! And, Dread, here's one of my favorite quotes describing how we grow up:

"If you're not liberal when you're younger, then you don't have heart/emotion. But if you're not conservative when you age, you're just flat out stupid!"
Posted by: BA   2005-06-22 14:22  

#18  No discussion of phrenology, Ken? Imagine my disappointment...
Posted by: Raj   2005-06-22 13:08  

#17  Hint to the gene-mappers....

Look for the gene that controls logic.
Posted by: Ebbomorong Ebbins3379   2005-06-22 12:57  

#16  LOL. Though genetics have, by his own account, blessed Kenny with a liberal set of blinders, it seems to have shorted him on intelligence and good looks! Kenny wants attention and cries out for it yet he offers nothing of substance in his "commentary." Lazy tree hut scholar is the most generous description available for Kenny. Dreadnaught is right. Lazy Kenny's found an easy (and very dangerous) answer to what is a complex question. Kenny's a proud and ignorant voice for the new bigotry.
Posted by: Tkat   2005-06-22 12:32  

#15  I am a conservative, have never voted Democrat in my life, but I firmly believe that for the good political health of our country we need two (or more) parties willing to rationally and civilly present their ideas to the electorate.

When I read stuff like this, it seems as if the Democrats are basically saying, "We're losing elections because the voters are stupid. See? It's in their untermenschen genetics." Once one subscribes to that, there is no desire to debate, only to coerce.

Not good for any of us.
Posted by: Dreadnought   2005-06-22 11:49  

#14  Desert Blondie---Ah, T.D. Lysenko, now there is a quack that rose to power way beyond the Peter Principle. Classic case of power grab and politics above science and well-established agricultural practices. Read a book years ago called, "the Rise and Fall of T.D. Lysenko." As Minister of Agriculture (or whatever they called him) he set Soviet agriculture back decades with his vernalization crap, etc.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2005-06-22 10:59  

#13  ..working on PhD.

Ah, so some day we will be calling you "Dr. Spook"?

Has a nice ring to it.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-06-22 09:58  

#12  It's genetic.

Roe Effect.

Liberalism's doomed.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2005-06-22 09:19  

#11  You can view more of his BS here on the KOMO website.

That's OK. I'd rather not. Life is too short.

(Would it be unsporting to say that he can't help writing dreck like this? I suspect it would be untrue as well).
Posted by: Phil Fraering   2005-06-22 09:17  

#10  Ken Schram is seattle's village idiot who regularly appears on KOMO TV.

If conservativism is due to gentics then what Ken is saying is akin to racism or gay-bashing. "Oh they cant help themselves because they are [ black | asian | gay | conservative | female | etc... ]

His email address is: kenschram@komo4news.com and he welcomes commentary (which is why I post his emial -- be nice now.)

You can view more of his BS here on the KOMO website.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-06-22 09:09  

#9  Fire up those bread ovens! We have work to do!!
Posted by: Joseph Mengele   2005-06-22 08:59  

#8  Editor note: Three "conservatives is genetic" stories were two to many. Thank you.
Posted by: Steve   2005-06-22 08:45  

#7  Ahh, yes. Genetic Superiority. Where have we heard that before. The left and the fascists have become one.
Posted by: 2b   2005-06-22 08:35  

#6  Then there is my sister, who probably voted for McGovern, who told me she is getting more and more conservative with time. I told her she was just a little slow, but with age and experience comes wisdom - at least in the folks with the good genes.
Posted by: Bobby   2005-06-22 08:16  

#5  What about the converse? If being conservative is a matter of genetics, then so is the opposite. So the real argument (such as it is!) is that conservatives are from the "shallow end" of the gene pool, something that the Dems floated after the election, but it sank.
Posted by: Bobby   2005-06-22 08:14  

#4  *Snicker* Ahh, yes. The New York Times once again presents us with a classic Insecure pseudointellectual (can someone give me the proper latin scientific classification for this common name? Thanks) slamming those he fears are better than he. Note the distinctive markings: claim of inherent genetic superiority, concern that environment may be a modifier (so he can blame it on Mummy and Daddy if he turns out to be wrong), egregious insult using childish images (piddling on the floor), and an unsubstantiated claim that dislike of one of his cherished icons equals intellectual inability.

What a pity the species hasn't gone extinct!
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-06-22 04:35  

#3  LMAO!

Hey Ken, bring it. Just be man enough to take the punishment that is coming your way. I guess I sorta knock that house of cards to pieces. Then again, its like kicking puppies, picking on low grade morons like that author. But here goes anyway.

I'd compare SATs anytime. 780 verbal, 790 math. Masters, 2 bachelors, working on PhD.

IQ in excess of 160.

Life-long military and intelligence work. Some would say Patriotic. Catholic. Conservative. Classical (Edmund Burke) Liberal when it comes to freedom. American to my core.

And damn proud of it.

Now Kenny, go back to sleep, dont worry - there are plenty of us smart armed and patriotic types out here so you can sleep safe in your bed. Your betters in the military will take care of you even if you dont deserve it. Just dont think about us if we scare you that much that you have to make up lies about us to try to bring us down to your level.

Its really fairly pitiful that the author would spout pseudo scientific theories in order to comfort himself in his position as loser in a battle of intellgence, wills and ideals. Pitiful, but common in the self-delusional world the Left lives in these days.

Unlike the pusillanimous popinjay that penned the pitiful screed in question, I'm intelligent enough to know that freedom has a price, and honest enough to tell the truth about it; I know people who have paid that price.
Posted by: OldSpook   2005-06-22 02:55  

#2  Ahh, how I love to read a scholarly paper from the Lysenko Institute of Genetic Studies.

Actually, with the exception of America's Test Kitchen and Nova, PBS usually just threatens my ability to stay awake during pledge drives. (Seems like they have 'em every other week now. Zzzzz.)
Posted by: Desert Blondie   2005-06-22 02:31  

#1  Iff one believs that any and all mortal humans have a living soul, and said soul is inherently or naturally "good", i.e. born "good", and such "good/goodness", however surreal, is akin to "natural" or innate "Perfection" as recognized by the soul, then its only "natural" for living human souls to seek the best in everyone, the world, and in reality, because "good" wants to work and be with the [other]"good". If RIGHTISM is defined as those common values that makes any organized group or society or nation the same, then Rightism and the Soul complement each other, NOT work against each other, regardless of any minutae differentiations!?
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2005-06-22 02:23  

00:00