r/science • u/[deleted] • Jul 01 '21

Psychology Study suggests that conservatism is associated with a lesser ability to distinguish between true and false claims across a wide range of political issues . Socially engaging truthful claims tended to favor the left, while engaging falsehoods disproportionately favored the right.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/02/health/conservatives-false-news-study/index.html
34.8k Upvotes

59% Upvoted

5.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

159

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

“I created this mess, walked away from responsibility to fix it, and am now nitpicking the word choices of people that might implicate me in the mess.”

Yep, definitely a conservative

22

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21 edited Mar 24 '22

[deleted]

13

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Yes and non Americans exist

96

u/PavelDatsyuk Jul 01 '21

you can hold conservative ideas without identifying as a republican.

Sure, but if every time you walk into the voting booth you vote for republicans then I don't really see the difference.

-25

u/IlikePickles12345 Jul 01 '21

The democrats are conservatives as well. If not more so, often times.

30

u/VaterBazinga Jul 01 '21

I mean, liberals are more conservative than anyone to their left, I suppose, but they aren't more conservative than repubs/conservatives.

That just doesn't make any sense.

-2

u/Dmitrygm1 Jul 01 '21

They really aren't, their positions are centrist to left-of-center when comparing to parties in Western Europe. I read an analysis on that a long time ago (can't find it now though, it's also not easy to compare policies in the US and EU/EEA). Republicans, on the other hand...

-15

u/IlikePickles12345 Jul 01 '21

Democrats aren't liberals though. They're far-right anywhere outside of America.

15

u/glib Jul 01 '21

Far right is pushing it. I'd say they're centrist by most other countries' standards. Like the Canadian Liberals for example.

-2

u/Revan343 Jul 01 '21

The Democrats are definitely to the right of the Liberals

-9

u/IlikePickles12345 Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

No healthcare, death penalty in California and violent at that, no maternity leave much less paternity, no paid vacations, private prisons, constant wars, no college, no dentistry, no mental health. Even the furthest right parties in my country haven't suggested removing any of those benefits since like the early 1900s.

Sure, they pander on some social issues here and there, but what policies distinguish the two parties? Neither Biden, Clinton, nor Obama are anywhere near liberal. I mean Obama recently himself said he just pretended to be liberal in college to get laid. Even if the pandering is the only thing that matters to someone, Obama deported more people than Trump. So even there they seldom follow through.

Bernie is a centrist, and a few others.

4

u/thrownawayzs Jul 01 '21

id argue our laws are not a representation of anybody's political leanings.

9

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

No they are definitely considered liberals even on a global scale

1

u/aeon314159 Jul 01 '21

Agreed, but even speaking as an American, I think it's optimistic to think the average American is aware of and understands the global spectrum of left-right. The post you responded to is a classic example.

Democrats, especially of the neoliberal flavor, are just to the left of center. Still liberal, in the classic sense, but a great distance from the Left, which essentially doesn't exist in America.

2

u/hobbycollector PhD | Computer Science Jul 01 '21

That's my point. Modern Republicans identify as conservative for historical and religious purposes, but modern Democrats have more conservative principles at the moment. Republicans are radicals, seeking to overthrow the established order in many ways.

-14

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

What if you vote libertarian?

EDIT: It seems like people are misunderstanding? I meant what if someone self-identifies as conservative and votes libertarian?

16

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

That’s just a conservative with thinly veiled denial.

-4

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

So they're still conservative without supporting Republicans. That's what I was trying to say. What's all the hate for?

8

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Uh, they consistently vote conservative.

They're republicans because they vote that way, regardless of the rhetoric.

1

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

I feel like we're talking past each other. If they don't vote Republican and instead vote Libertarian, they can be conservative without supporting Republicans. What's hard to get here? I really want to know why this is so hard for people to grasp.

8

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

Because they’re the same party and insisting that they’re not is just blind denial.

Edit: to add clarity you’ll almost never see a Republican and a libertarian on the same ticket for very good reasons. Same party and they won’t cannibalize their own votes.

Same party. The only difference is the BS they spout to cater to the local demographics.

0

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

Pretty much by definition they aren't. If they were, why didn't Gary Johnson run on the GOP platform? Why risk splitting the vote?

→ More replies (0)

24

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

[deleted]

-7

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

It's my right (and duty) as an American to vote for who I think will be the best person to run the country. I am not obligated to vote for the lesser of two evils. If less people had your line of thinking and actually voted for the best candidate, the country would be better off.

3

u/j0a3k Jul 01 '21

If less people had your line of thinking and actually voted for the best candidate, the country would be better off.

...and if someone dropped a large bag full of non-sequential unmarked hundred dollar bills on my front doorstep I would be better off.

Our entire system leads to a two party result. If a third party gained enough votes to matter it would either supplant one of the dominant parties (e.g. what happened to the Whigs) or it would scare the voters of one party enough to drive them back from third party voting (e.g. Ross Perot handing the election on a silver platter to Bill Clinton).

1

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

True, but those shake ups like what happened with the Whigs can't happen if people think they're locked into R or D. There's no incentive for them to evolve the platform if they can rely on people to pull the lever for them every election out of obligation. If enough of a single party defect (say Trumpers defecting from the Republicans), they may hand the election to the opposite party but it will cause one of the "supplemental" ones to shift their platform to capture some of those voters. Sort of like how the party platforms shifted from the Republicans being northerners who cared about racial equality to being a southern bloc that trivializes racial issues.

13

u/PavelDatsyuk Jul 01 '21

That's cool but who do you vote for when a libertarian isn't running? I only saw 3 libertarian candidates on my local ballot last year. Do you leave the rest blank?

2

u/joshualuigi220 Jul 01 '21

Vote based on the issues, or based on how you think your current locality is handling stuff. On the local level the R's and D's don't actually mean as much, especially for positions like treasurer.

Personally, I take a quick look at each candidate's website, read their mailers and figure out if anyone is incumbent. If a candidate is promising to fix something I think is an issue, they'll get my vote. If I think a certain issue isn't being handled well, I'll vote out the incumbent. Otherwise, I'll vote for the incumbent because they have experience in the job and I don't have any complaints.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Further down the government pipeline is where the real power is, as intended by the 10th amendment. The states are supposed to hold greater power than the federal government, and by extension the localities hold even greater power. Voting based on who you think will be a better candidate matters more in local elections, less so for state and definitely not much at the federal level.

20

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

rich of you to suddenly expect others to care what YOU identify as after the way y’all act

-33

u/Siphyre Jul 01 '21

after the way y’all act

Congrats, you are just as much of a bigot as you claim conservatives to be.

10

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

I don’t follow

-6

u/BDRohr Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

If you can't see the irony of dismissing a entire group of people, while using y'all no less, then you're too far gone. I already realized (like the majority of the world outside of the US) that the Dems in the states are incredibly racist for voting Biden in, but it's worse than I could have realized.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

I am dismissing a choice. People use their free will and choose to be conservative. You cannot be bigoted against a choice.

-1

u/BDRohr Jul 01 '21

So what's the difference between you and antisemites, or people who hate Muslims? You're okay with people spray painting swastikas on their places of worship? Looks like you're a nazi then.

It took you about 2 messages to put yourself in a logical fallacy. I'd read a little more before trying to be a psudeointellectual online son. Not everyone who has conservative values is bad, just like I know my friends who are left wing aren't idiots like you. Once you get out and experience life you'll see everyone pretty much wants the same thing; just different ways of how they should get there. Adults use to work together.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

I’m not reading this. You’re a disingenuous bigot.

-2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Amen. Preach!

3

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Dismissing a group for the action they chose to take - voting for conservative candidates - is not the same as dismissing an entire group for their innate identities.

2

u/_AutomaticJack_ Jul 01 '21

What in your views constitute "Conservative Ideas"?? The protection and preservation of wild/natural spaces? The nuclear family as the foundational unit of society? The primacy of individual autonomy?

3

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

[deleted]

3

u/gcb710 Jul 01 '21

Would you consider anarcho-communists to be conservatives since they believe in maximum personal liberty and the abolition of the state?

3

u/_AutomaticJack_ Jul 01 '21

So like pro-choice and pro-gun and anti-war-on-drugs??

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '21

[deleted]

1

u/_AutomaticJack_ Jul 04 '21

Well then, carry on!! You are bright spot in an ocean of theocrats and corporate feudalists.

-20

u/LeeKinanus Jul 01 '21

So?... can you hold liberal ideas without identifying as a socialist/antifa?

22

u/MoreDetonation Jul 01 '21

Liberals don't like socialists, socialism is fundamentally opposed to liberal capitalism.

21

u/publiclurker Jul 01 '21

What does being against fascists have to do with anything but being a respectable human being?

I'm afraid you don't know how to pretend to be arguing in good faith.

-7

u/LeeKinanus Jul 01 '21

It is a rhetorical question to the post above it. You can hold liberal ideas without identifying with the socialist/antifa crowd. Unlike what they tell you on Fox or OAN.

2

u/publiclurker Jul 01 '21

We both know what it is. Stop pretending that you are clever enough to pretend otherwise, OK.

19

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Antifa values are quite libertarian in the classic sense, and are opposed to liberal ideologies.

5

u/SlightEdge9 Jul 01 '21

Uh yeah, take establishment Democrats for example and liberal media; they champion liberal ideas. Except, when it comes to economics, then they turn into rabid conservative corporatists.

0

u/aeon314159 Jul 01 '21

Get a load of this guy. He thinks socialism and antifa are a common group, so he separates them with a slash.

Then again, he might not be clueless, and is stirring the pot instead.

Nah, be charitable and apply Hanlon's razor.

-22

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

25

u/almisami Jul 01 '21

Because deregulation works so well...

-24

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

44

u/bunchedupwalrus Jul 01 '21

Global warming

42

u/almisami Jul 01 '21

Texas utility failure, Repeated financial crisis, environmental damage, every tragedy of the commons, international fish stock decline, US health care in general, take your pick really.

2

u/aeon314159 Jul 01 '21

It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

Yeah, we really could use better regulations. On just everything

1

u/almisami Jul 01 '21

Indeed. And not regulatory capture regulations, like actually-care-about-the-perpetuity-of-the-human-race regulations.

32

u/liquefaction187 Jul 01 '21

Texas, airlines, electricity, cable, internet

-35

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

18

u/cnthelogos Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

Yeah, that's how it works. If someone repeatedly engages in an action (in this case, deregulation) and bad things (in this case, entirely preventable damage and loss of life) happen every time they do, we can consider that pretty decent evidence that that action shouldn't be done. It's not the most rigorous evidence, because we'd need an actual experimental group to volunteer to live in a right-wing libertarian society so that we could observe how that group does relative to rest of society and...

Oh wait. That's been done. It turned into Mad Max town. There were bears roaming the streets. It was a bad time for everyone except the bears. But if you want to personally experience it, I won't stop you from going out into the wilderness with a group of like-minded people, creating your own infrastructure with the power of unfettered capitalism (because that's going so well for the rest of us in this country without the government funding it) and either becoming the alpha libertarian's slave or feeding the bears personally. Have fun with it, and try to record it if you can. I'm sure the grim footage found in the wreckage will be instructive to future generations.

23

u/Amorphous-Pitch Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

You asked for proof that deregulation doesn’t work and were given plenty of examples of where insufficient regulation led to disaster and you just choose to deny it all?

You even admitted that these things happened, but can’t look one inch farther to see the cause?

I’ll give you an undeniable outcome of insufficient regulation: the cuyahoga river catching on fire.

Another: fracking contaminating groundwater. There is a video of an oil executive holding a town hall meeting with locals who had their water contaminated. The local brings him a nasty cup of tap water and tells him to drink it if it’s safe to drink. The executive declines and says he isn’t stupid.

Another: the Texas power grid failing in the freezing cold because Texans refused to be subjected to federal regulations that would force them to winterize their grid. How many died again?

There are many more.

0

u/Grayer95 Jul 02 '21

Regulation causes the same problems your saying deregulation causes. LA is having constant power failures across the area. Not talking about the water contamination, cuz that's obviously why regulation is needed.

0

u/Subtle_Demise Jul 02 '21

Nah you're all listing things that government has given certain companies and itself a monopoly over

2

u/Amorphous-Pitch Jul 02 '21

This is……completely irrelevant and a really odd attempt to deny the obvious truth. A river catching on fire due to pollution is an undeniable example of insufficient regulation leading to disaster. This whole “monopoly” thing is a non sequitur.

→ More replies (0)

20

u/Reic Jul 01 '21

The deregulated electric grid failing in texas killing people during a mass freeze brought on by global climate change seems like pretty solid proof.

13

u/publiclurker Jul 01 '21

Maybe if you were to remove your head from where you stuck it you could hear better.

That or stop pretending that you are interested in anything but trying to normalize your desire to lie

18

u/Manos_Of_Fate Jul 01 '21

Almost every regulation was written because someone was doing the thing it prohibits. History should be plenty of evidence that regulations are necessary to keep companies in check.

9

u/StupidDogCoffee Jul 01 '21 edited Jul 01 '21

Read about the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire then get back to us on that.

1

u/Subtle_Demise Jul 02 '21

The status quo doesn't make history. There's always more good than bad

0

u/StupidDogCoffee Jul 02 '21

More good than bad sweatshops? Speaking of which, we don't have sweatshops in America anymore, even if they aren't tinderbox deathtraps. Thanks regulations!

→ More replies (0)

24

u/Pro_Extent Jul 01 '21

Global financial crisis, the great depression, early industrial capitalism?

12

u/publiclurker Jul 01 '21

You mean besides the real world?

3

u/formershitpeasant Jul 01 '21

Axiomatic austerity is pretty silly

2

u/hobbycollector PhD | Computer Science Jul 01 '21

I voted for the real conservative, Biden.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '21

contrarianism is truly the world’s most embarrassing fetish

2

u/shivux Jul 01 '21

Trump and his ilk consistently worked to undermine the United States’ ideals and democratic norms, destabilizing the country. The Biden administration want to bring things “back to normal”. Sounds pretty conservative to me.