Liberal or conservative? Reactions to disgust are a dead giveaway

October 29, 2014
brain
White matter fiber architecture of the brain. Credit: Human Connectome Project.

Maggot infestations, rotting carcasses, unidentifiable gunk in the kitchen sink – how much your brain responds to disgusting images could predict whether you are liberal or conservative.

In a study to be published in an upcoming issue of Current Biology, an international team of scientists led by Virginia Tech reports that the strength of a person's reaction to repulsive images can forecast their political ideology.

"Disgusting images generate neural responses that are highly predictive of political orientation even when those neural responses don't correspond with an individual's conscious reaction to the images," said Read Montague, a Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute professor who led the study. "Remarkably, we found that the brain's response to a single disgusting image was enough to predict an individual's political ideology."

In a brain scanner, participants were shown disgusting images, such as dirty toilets or mutilated carcasses, mixed with neutral and pleasant images, such as landscapes and babies.

Afterward, the subjects took a standard political ideology inventory, answering questions about how often they discuss politics and whether they agreed or disagreed with hot-button topics such as school prayer and gay marriage.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, scientists from the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute – in collaboration with researchers from University College London, Rice University, the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, and Yale University – recorded brain activity of the subjects responding to the images.

Responses to disgusting images could predict, with 95 percent to 98 percent accuracy, how a person would answer questions on the political survey.

The results suggest political ideologies are mapped onto established neural responses that may have served to protect our ancestors against environmental threats, Montague said. Those neural responses could be passed down family lines—it's likely that disgust reactions are inherited.

"We pursued this research because previous work in a twin registry showed that political ideology—literally the degree to which someone is liberal or conservative—was highly heritable, almost as heritable as height," said Montague, who directs the Computational Psychiatry Unit at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute.

Conservatives tend to have more magnified responses to disgusting images, but scientists don't know exactly why, Montague said.

The responses could be a callback to the deep, adverse reactions primitive ancestors needed to avoid contamination and disease. To prevent unsavory consequences, they had to learn to separate the canteen from the latrine.

Montague points out that we're not necessarily hardwired to respond on instinct alone. He uses height as an analogy.

"Genetics predetermines height – but not fully," Montague said. "Nutrition, sleep, and starvation can all change someone's ultimate height. But tall people's children tend to be tall, and that's a kind of starting point. If we can begin to understand that some automatic reactions to political issues may be simply that – reactions – then we might take the temperature down a bit in the current boiler of political discourse."

People are unique among animals in their degree of cognitive control. Montague calls it a behavioral superpower.

"People can deny their biological instincts for an idea – think of hunger strikes for political reasons," Montague said. "That requires a high degree of cognitive control, and that's the point."

The takeaway message for Election Day?

"Think, don't just react," Montague said. "But no one needs neuroscience to know that's a good idea."

Explore further: Political views are reflected in brain structure

More information: Current Biology, Ahn et al.: "Nonpolitical images evoke neural predictors of political ideology." www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(14)01213-5

Related Stories

Political views are reflected in brain structure

April 7, 2011

We all know that people at opposite ends of the political spectrum often really can't see eye to eye. Now, a new report published online on April 7th in Current Biology reveals that those differences in political orientation ...

Cleanliness is next to... conservatism?

August 15, 2012

(Medical Xpress) -- In every election cycle, politicians on both sides of the aisle are accused of practicing ‘dirty politics.’ Neither side is immune from these charges but research from psychological science suggests ...

Recommended for you

An inflexible diet led to the disappearance of the cave bear

August 23, 2016

Senckenberg scientists have studied the feeding habits of the extinct cave bear. Based on the isotope composition in the collagen of the bears' bones, they were able to show that the large mammals subsisted on a purely vegan ...

131 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Sonhouse
3 / 5 (8) Oct 29, 2014
Looks like a political statement in itself by not revealing just which group did which response.
nevermark
4.5 / 5 (11) Oct 29, 2014
Its not a political statement to not give that information, but it would have been interesting. Its possible the original paper does.

But your quick negative response to a new insight (i.e. glass-half-empty), gives away all your political biases instantly. However I am not disclosing what those are here. ;)
Tektrix
5 / 5 (6) Oct 29, 2014
In previous studies that used galvanic skin response (http://phys.org/n...l#nRlv): "... conservatives responded to the pictures with much more intense disgust than did liberals."

fMRI and GSR are certainly two very different ways to measure response, but given that the response was so strong and obvious in both cases, I'd bet dollars to donuts the same outcome occurred in both sets of experiments.

tritace
Oct 29, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 29, 2014
In previous studies that used galvanic skin response (http://phys.org/n...l#nRlv): "... conservatives responded to the pictures with much more intense disgust than did liberals."
@Textrix
how does that work with chronic or severe pain, i wonder
Strong pain or other types responses etc can skew the baseline (like for lie detectors, etc) which alters the results

Can you view the study?
i get a page of blank white and no info
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 29, 2014
"participants were shown disgusting images, such as dirty toilets or mutilated carcasses, "

Whose standard is used to define 'disgusting'?

That would bias the data.
Shabs42
5 / 5 (7) Oct 29, 2014
Looks like a political statement in itself by not revealing just which group did which response.


And from the article:

Conservatives tend to have more magnified responses to disgusting images, but scientists don't know exactly why, Montague said.


Did they add that in, did you miss it, or am I misunderstanding?
Steve 200mph Cruiz
3.9 / 5 (11) Oct 29, 2014
Makes sense, all the conservatives are hysterical over ebola, they aren't even thinking about what it takes to solve this issue.
ekim
5 / 5 (3) Oct 30, 2014
This could explain the political leanings of doctors. Studies have shown that infectious disease physicians were more likely to be liberal while plastic surgeons were more likely to be conservative.
teslaberry
1 / 5 (3) Oct 30, 2014
this is characteristic psuedoscience clustering very disproportionately for DECADES in the area of MRI research.

brain activation research is not ALL pseudo-science but almost all of it is bad science, inconclusive , sloppy, not repeatable, controllable or verifieable, with subjective categorization of subject states and status' regarding feeling, tendencies, political affiliations, ----RIFE WITH SELF REPORTING.

mri research is much more like social science then real science in the overwhelming number of cases in which mri is not really used to shed light on a system in order to analyze and tweak how that system---the brain----works at a more micro level.

some mri research does do this, but the above research is classic nonsense. this is SO pervasive in the funding for mri it makes you question the very confidence in our institutions that account for the lions share of funding decisions provided for scientific research. many of those decision making bodies are scientists!
BSD
1 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2014
"The responses could be a callback to the deep, adverse reactions primitive ancestors needed to avoid contamination and disease. To prevent unsavory consequences, they had to learn to separate the canteen from the latrine."

Remarkable I'm surprised that conservitards had a brain at all.

It comes as no surprise that conservatards have a "brain" closer to primitives than liberals.

Just look at a conservatard's behaviour, for example, take those types that watch Fox News
(I mean it, please, take them) and this study vindicates ones observations of these beings.

Slow thunkun, fat arsed, religious, gun toting peasants that choose to be disgusted at sexual images but think nothing of violent images. They are fascinated by "reality" TV because they think it's real. Ronald Reagan was their greatest president with an IQ of around 90.
They believe religion and this thing called God and overall, don't like thunkun if they can get away with it.

Just remarkable see science works.
brahmix
not rated yet Oct 30, 2014
Proof:
(http to)

townhall.com/political-cartoons/2014/10/28/124321
daggaz
5 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2014
Considering that liberal/conservative is an incomplete metric, at best, and a false dichotomy, at worse, for describing political views of complex human beings, seems to me this study is critically flawed from the get-go.

Smells more like they are trying to further prop up the supposed differences, actually.
KBK
3 / 5 (4) Oct 30, 2014
Yes,

Utilization of a incomplete metric is classic societal control mechanisms.... in-situ. A smaller circle of incomplete logic and incomplete facts..for the incomplete mind. An incomplete mind, which is the larger part of society.

Fascism's secret sauce is to remain hidden as long as possible, and stir the pot of conflict. Nobody wants fascism, no one except fascists. Which is why they hide and ...stir. They are open in their position, once they have conflict and control via conflict. Conflict which was created via roused base emotions enacted en-masse.

Go look outside, look around... ask yourself what you see.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (8) Oct 30, 2014
go outside look around ask yourself what you see
Well in the distance I see fascists who are in the process of amassing huge armies, conquering vast swaths of land, and beheading and crucifying any who disagree with their extremist dogma. They enjoy kidnapping little girls and executing ranks of POWs for posting on YouTube. And they promise in these vids to spread this terror worldwide.

I think it is right and proper to use any means necessary to destroy fascists like these before they can do much more damage don't you?

I think you would by the time they are marching toward your neighborhood but by then of course it would be too late to do anything about it, wouldn't it?
gkam
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 30, 2014
KBK is correct.

Remember the screams of "WMD!" to the emotionally vulnerable?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 30, 2014
KBK is correct.

Remember the screams of "WMD!" to the emotionally vulnerable?
You haven't been watching the news. These fascists have found sadaams WMDs and are now using them against infidels. This is what real fascists are capable of.
gkam
2.8 / 5 (11) Oct 30, 2014
Real Fascists imposed the Bush/Cheney Police State on us.

Those old chemical weapons left over from the gift from Reagan were not useable. The rest got destroyed, like Saddam said.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (8) Oct 30, 2014
Real Fascists imposed the Bush/Cheney Police State on us.

Those old chemical weapons left over from the gift from Reagan were not useable. The rest got destroyed, like Saddam said.

ISIS is using the destroyed WMD?

What is the definition of 'disgusting images'?

Images of Bill or Hillary are quite disgusting along with just about anyone who thinks they know how I should live.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2014
"The jihadist group bringing terror to Iraq overran a Saddam Hussein chemical weapons complex on Thursday, gaining access to disused stores of hundreds of tonnes of potentially deadly poisons including mustard gas and sarin."
"Even CNN reported that these chemical weapons were still "dangerous." "
http://www.ijrevi...raq-war/

It's disgusting how 'liberals' want Muslim armies to have WMD.
gkam
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 30, 2014
I can't read the comments from Rygg, since I locked her out, but want to say: "Bring 'em on!".
Tektrix
5 / 5 (2) Oct 30, 2014
In previous studies that used galvanic skin response (http://phys.org/n...l#nRlv): "... conservatives responded to the pictures with much more intense disgust than did liberals."
@Textrix
how does that work with chronic or severe pain, i wonder
Strong pain or other types responses etc can skew the baseline (like for lie detectors, etc) which alters the results

Can you view the study?
i get a page of blank white and no info


No, Cap'n, I didn't see the study- my comment was just a Bayes-ish hunch based on the prior work described in the linked PhysOrg post. As for the non-normative cases, pretty sure they could skew results. But one would hope such cases would be accounted for in a final result (but without the paper, this too is a guess).
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2014
Those old chemical weapons left over from the gift from Reagan were not useable. The rest got destroyed, like Saddam said
"U.S. officials don't believe the Sunni militants will be able to create a functional chemical weapon from the material. The weapons stockpiled at the Al Muthanna complex are old, contaminated and hard to move...

"Military officials said the U.S. was well aware of the Muthanna stockpile and wouldn't have left it there if it posed a military threat. Still, when the U.S. pulled out of Iraq, it didn't anticipate a large swath of the country, including numerous military bases, would be overrun by radical Sunni militants. One defense official said that if the U.S. had known the Iraqi government would lose control so soon, it might not have left the old chemical weapons in place."

-You believe what the fascist imperialist US industrial complex tells you? Or you just believe whatever makes you feel good?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 30, 2014
Real Fascists imposed the Bush/Cheney Police State on us
Yeah I know, off the pigs. How does it feel to be a 60 year old in striped bell bottoms?
https://www.youtu...Yu0nJCVg

Caliph = Fuehrer
Police state = third reiich

Failure to oppose this now = WW3
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 30, 2014
What is the objective definition of 'disgusting'?
Did the German socialists find concentration camps disgusting.
Did the Japanese find POW camps disgusting?

ekim
not rated yet Oct 30, 2014
What is the objective definition of 'disgusting'?
Did the German socialists find concentration camps disgusting.
Did the Japanese find POW camps disgusting?


Are you suggesting that race has a factor in the feeling of disgust. For some people perhaps. This study was not questioning feelings towards race, but political leanings.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 30, 2014
No, Cap'n, I didn't see the study- my comment was just a Bayes-ish hunch based on the prior work described in the linked PhysOrg post. As for the non-normative cases, pretty sure they could skew results. But one would hope such cases would be accounted for in a final result (but without the paper, this too is a guess).
@Tektrix
ok, thanks

I would hope such things would be accounted for, but sometimes it is just not apparent, like the initial studies with the lie detector and galvanic skin responses etc

thanks again
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Oct 30, 2014
Are you suggesting that race has a factor in the feeling of disgust.

You are.
I suggest there may be a cultural factor, but then, again, what is the objective definition of disgust?
If there is no objective definition then this study is BS, which I think it is anyway.

'Liberals' seem to be disgusted by photos of murdered babies when people put them on signs outside abortion clinics, but don't seem to mind what occurs in those 'clinics'.
barakn
1 / 5 (1) Oct 30, 2014
Real Fascists imposed the Bush/Cheney Police State on us
Yeah I know, off the pigs. How does it feel to be a 60 year old in striped bell bottoms?
https://www.youtu...Yu0nJCVg

Caliph = Fuehrer
Police state = third reiich

Failure to oppose this now = WW3

Put up or shut up. Go to war alongside the Danish motorcycle gangs and leave us alone.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Oct 30, 2014
Still, no objective definition of 'disgust'.
tritace
Oct 30, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
tritace
Oct 30, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (4) Oct 31, 2014
Real Fascists imposed the Bush/Cheney Police State on us
Yeah I know, off the pigs. How does it feel to be a 60 year old in striped bell bottoms?
https://www.youtu...Yu0nJCVg

Caliph = Fuehrer
Police state = third reiich

Failure to oppose this now = WW3

Put up or shut up. Go to war alongside the Danish motorcycle gangs and leave us alone.
Us meaning...? We have specialists who are very good at these things. As for motorcycle gangs - remember altamont? They're usually a clusterfuk.

"Sometimes you gotta fight." -said the kid who beat me up in the 8th grade.
BSD
3 / 5 (2) Oct 31, 2014
What is the objective definition of 'disgusting'?
Did the German socialists find concentration camps disgusting.
Did the Japanese find POW camps disgusting?



Interesting you should mention those examples, both countries were ruled by rightwing dictatorships. So yes, German socialists were disgusted at concentration camps, since it was conservatards that put them in there.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Oct 31, 2014
q]ruled by rightwing dictatorships.
No, they were both quite socialist.

And still, no objective definition of 'disgust'.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Oct 31, 2014
ruled by rightwing dictatorships.

No, they were both quite socialist.

And still, no objective definition of 'disgust'.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (4) Oct 31, 2014
What is the objective definition of 'disgusting'?
Did the German socialists find concentration camps disgusting.
Did the Japanese find POW camps disgusting?



Interesting you should mention those examples, both countries were ruled by rightwing dictatorships. So yes, German socialists were disgusted at concentration camps, since it was conservatards that put them in there.


Such terms as "right-wing" are relative, to era and country. For example, the Nazi's were Against Capitalism and obviously For government control,.... so 180* counter to American right-wing conservatives.

ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Oct 31, 2014
'Liberals' need to use subjective terms to keep their socialist lies going.
First they called themselves 'progressive' and then 'liberal' and not, sometimes, 'progressive', again.
All the while they are still socialists acquiring more power to control the lives of others.
adam_russell_9615
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
All this political talk is just disgusting.
Shabs42
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
'Liberals' need to use subjective terms to keep their socialist lies going.
First they called themselves 'progressive' and then 'liberal' and not, sometimes, 'progressive', again.
All the while they are still socialists acquiring more power to control the lives of others.


You would almost think that not every person has the exact same beliefs and doesn't like to be labeled the exact same way...
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Feldagast
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
I will be happy when November 3rd is here.
verkle
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
nly conservatives could get so locked into their own opinions, li

And this is a bad thing?
What wrong with a govt the ONLY protects life, liberty and property?

The headlines states "...Reactions to disgust..."
Disgust IS a reaction. One that is based upon the subjectivity of the individual.
What is the objective definition of 'disgust'?
MR166
3 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Actually I found the article to be fascinating. It explains a lot about society. Above all it does not make one group correct all the time and one group wrong. It is kind of like a Yin/Yang sort of thing ,progress vs stability. Too much of ether can kill the species.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Nov 02, 2014
It explains a lot about society.

It explains more about the authors of the study and those who fall for their conclusions

'Liberals' can't understand why people don't buy their BS so they think they can use science as a tool to explain how those who don't support them are somehow inferior.
The same idea has been applied to those who question AGWites.
Andrea OL
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014


What about the fact that Liberals find traditional norms very disgusting and demean them as 'racism', 'homophobia', 'xenophobia', and etc?

It seems cons find disgusting things disgusting whereas Libs find normal things disgusting.

Libs find it disgusting that cons find fecal penetration among men to be disgusting.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
It explains a lot about society.

It explains more about the authors of the study and those who fall for their conclusions

'Liberals' can't understand why people don't buy their BS so they think they can use science as a tool to explain how those who don't support them are somehow inferior.
The same idea has been applied to those who question AGWites.

What is the objective definition of 'disgust'?
Eddy Courant
3 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
LOL. They could have just offered them some weed and watched their reaction:

"I now have absolute proof that smoking even one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-bomb blast." ~ Ronald Reagan

"The cannabis experience has greatly improved my appreciation for art, a subject which I had never much appreciated before. The understanding of the intent of the artist which I can achieve when high sometimes carries over to when I'm down. This is one of many human frontiers which cannabis has helped me traverse. A very similar improvement in my appreciation of music has occurred with cannabis. For the first time I have been able to hear the separate parts of a three-part harmony and the richness of the counterpoint." ~Carl Sagan
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Eddy therein lies the problem, when does "progress" cease being a positive and turn into a negative? Where does one draw the line? From what I understand a little cocaine can really liven up your day. Or perhaps one would like to mellow out a bit with a little H.

On an even more basic level has the change to a one parent family really helped society or hurt it. I cannot think of a better way to insure that children live in poverty.

These are all liberal vs conservative questions.
Shabs42
5 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
I think it is because conservatives have a clearer picture of what is right and wrong, and we are not afraid to call evil what is evil, and to call disgusting what is really disgusting.

Liberals delight in obfuscating truth, and in calling good evil.



Of you could spin it the other way and say that convervatives have a clearer idea of what past generations thought was good and evil; while liberals think for themselves and make their own decisions.

People saying conservatives are the ones for liberty are really funny. Liberty to get married to who you want? Liberty to do with your own body what you want? Liberty for non-violent criminals whose skin tone is darker than eggshell?
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
MR166, the lines are blurred. A great many cons are potheads after all. A great many dems not. RE: all that other stuff, who knows? Bama, once a pothead, is now against it. Buckley, if you recall, was very pro. Good news: the stuff shows great medical promise! ;-}-~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shabs42
5 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2014


What about the fact that Liberals find traditional norms very disgusting and demean them as 'racism', 'homophobia', 'xenophobia', and etc?

It seems cons find disgusting things disgusting whereas Libs find normal things disgusting.

Libs find it disgusting that cons find fecal penetration among men to be disgusting.


Lots of hetero couples have anal sex. Lots of homo couples do not. Either way, the disgusting part is not accepting people for who they are when what they are causes no harm to others. Especially if you're religious and you aren't accepting the way God made people. As for me, no religion, but I accept what your genetics and upbringing make you as long as you aren't harming others.

Show me some examples of extreme conservatives being lynched or beaten and dragged behind a car as blacks and gays have been many times in this country. Those are actual disgusting acts.
Shabs42
5 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
And with that, I'll be leaving this article as it is obviously an unwinnable argument, since by your very nature, conservatives will be unwilling to change their opinions.
Eddy Courant
5 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
Shabs42: "Show me some examples of extreme conservatives being lynched or beaten and dragged behind a car as blacks and gays have been many times in this country. Those are actual disgusting acts."
-------------------------
Well done, Sir!

MR166
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
"Shabs42: "Show me some examples of extreme conservatives being lynched or beaten and dragged behind a car as blacks and gays have been many times in this country. Those are actual disgusting acts.""

How about considering the 100s of millions of people killed by the liberal heroes like Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Pol Pot.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (6) Nov 02, 2014
The reason for the results of the study are obvious,.... Liberals have been conditioned for and so assimilated to disgusting things on account of their massive bed-wetting.

Disgusting degenerate behaviour is at the core of their philosophy,... massive welfare, unions, non-criticallity wrt government failures, the need for nanny-state, class envy, anti-capitalism propaganda, race baiting, redistribution (steeling) of wealth, weakness on criminals,....
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
Liberty to get married to who you want?

No, it's how the STATE defines marriage. The STATE defined marriage as one man and one woman, not too closely related and over a certain age, for a reason.
When the people have the choice to define marriage, they generally support the above definition, for the same reason.
If 'liberals' really want liberty to marry whatever they want, demand the state get out of the marriage business.
But, they won't because the real point of homosexual marriage is to force people to accept homosexuality. It has nothing to do with marriage.
The unintended consequence will be state ending prohibition of polygamy. Polygamists are likely to be more conservative and have more children.

Still, no objective definition of disgust.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
"Shepard's tragic and untimely demise may not have been fueled by his sexual orientation, but by drugs. For Shepard had likely agreed to trade methamphetamines for sex. And it killed him."
http://nypost.com...s-death/

What is really disgusting is how the 'liberals' demanded 'hate crime' legislation and used this case as an example.
Fortunately, WY didn't bow to the real hate of the 'liberals' and respect the life, liberty and property of each individual, regardless.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
Thought police are disgusting:

" Ofsted inspectors have come under fire in recent weeks for being overzealous in their desire to root out any behaviour which doesn't adhere to their standards, including by asking inappropriate questions during their snap inspections designed to probe whether pupils held tolerant views towards gays and members of other religions. "
http://www.breitb...-Closure
Why don't 'liberals' find such intolerance disgusting?

There was an excellent movie on the topic, "Equilibrium", which is what happens in a 'liberal' society.
MR166
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
Most people confuse liberal with libertarian. The last thing that a true liberal/progressive wants to see is individual freedom as illustrated by the 32 oz soft drink debacle. "Group Safety and Welfare" is skillfully used as a tool to strip away individual rights and insure government control of the masses.

The people here seem to be closer to libertarians than progressives. Libertarians believe in as much individual freedom and as little government control as possible. In this respect Libertarians are closer to Conservatives than Progressives.
Eddy Courant
5 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
The party of intellectual curiosity v the party of none. LOL. SSDD.
MR166
3 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
"The party of intellectual curiosity v the party of none. LOL. SSDD." Why don't you include "tolerance" while your at it.

Liberals are not as open minded as they portray themselves to be. They have very little tolerance for ideas and opinions other than their own. Hence all of the finger pointing and name calling. Let one black man express a conservative opinion and he is called an "Uncle Tom" and ostracized.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Tritace Liberals also have an inflated sense of their own intelligence. How many news reports have described Democrats as "The smartest people in the room." and Republicans as total idiots? In other words, "You must be smart because you agree with me".
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
conservatives have also inflated trust into wisdom of crowds

Just the opposite.
Conservatives respect the individual, not crowds.
Conservatives do not trust any crowd wisdom. Which is why they support the limited power described in the US Constitution.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
MR166, I can't stand intolerance. ;-)
MR166
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
LOL Eddy!!!!!!!
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
it does work substantially better for global issues like the solving of environmental problems.

Socialism works well for solving environmental problems? Since when?
conservatives adhere on groupthink

Yes, conservatives don't trust individuals with too much power and especially don't trust a mob, socialists, with ANY power.
The only demonstrated groupthink I see is with the 'liberal' fantasy they can use force to make people live in their Utopia.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Noumenon
1.8 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2014
"The party of intellectual curiosity v the party of none. LOL. SSDD."


Liberals are not as open minded as they portray themselves to be. They have very little tolerance for ideas and opinions other than their own. Hence all of the finger pointing and name calling. Let one black man express a conservative opinion and he is called an "Uncle Tom" and ostracized.


In the USA liberal progressives advocated for the 'fairness doctrine', a governmental attempt to regulate free speech, ...and even at the presidential level, routinely and openly discredits via propaganda the conservative leaning Fox News, and conservative talk radio.

Liberals are open minded only to the extent that you agree with them. They are experts in propagandizing caricatures of their intellectual competition, to be spoon fed to their naive base,.... whom are for the most part ignorant enough to take it without spitting to much out.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
"In communism all people work honestly without cheating their society, in laissez-faire society all people are doing their business honestly without cheating each other."

Titrace here is a little story that highlights the problem with Socialism. When the Pilgrims first settled in the US everyone was to share equally in the harvest but some people put in more effort into farming than others and the harvests failed. Soon afterwards the system was changed into ownership of individual harvests and food was more plentiful.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Nov 02, 2014
Tritace our problem today is that we have "Crony Capitalism" ie. capitalism that is the owner of the political system. Don't think ( in US terms ) that this is a Republican/Conservative or a Democratic/Liberal thing, everything is controlled by the few. Basically, there is no real difference between the parties since it is all a one world government ( The few puppet masters ) system. When George the Ist said that this is the start of a "New World Order" we should have listened.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
but anyway the laissez-faire business requires the strong central government

No, it does not require a strong central govt.
It helps to have a distributed, limited govt that only protects the property rights of individuals.
The problem is, the people are cheaters by their very nature and they tend to hijack

Which is why a distributed, LIMITED govt is required. It is much more difficult to control limited, distributed govts and one large central state.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
n laissez-faire society all people are doing their business honestly without cheating each other.

No.
With free markets, dishonesty and fraud are quickly dealt with by competitors and customers.
You can't do the idealistic social system with non-ideal people.

'Liberals' believe they can.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
This is the hidden cost of free market society.

These costs are not hidden.
the more extensive and also deeper its control must be for to detect frauds and misbehavior of its attendees

No.
Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme was undetected precisely because of 'extensive govt control'.
It was a competitor of Madoff who tried to warn the govt, and was ignored.
The same agency that investigates robbery and arson can also investigate and prosecute fraud.
The fallacy of 'liberals' is that by creating a new law or regulation, people won't commit theft or fraud.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
"The same crowd that decries the huge role of "money in politics" and fears that big business will take over the world then suggests giving the federal government more power… as if Leviathan will be constrained not by the billionaire bankers and arms manufacturers but instead by voters punching chads every four years. The idea goes that regulatory power trickles up to bureaucrats with good intentions and an unbiased understanding of the common good.

It's worth dwelling on this crucial point. The whole schtick of the regulatory State is that we can trust a group of technocrats in Washington, DC, to guard the interests of the people by standing up to the greedy and soulless business tycoons who — left to their own devices — would lie, cheat, and kill in order to turn a profit. Yet, anyone with an open mind can see that this approach has, time and again, utterly failed in practice."
http://fee.org/th...be-fixed
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
"For example, Harry Markopolos had been writing the SEC since 1999 warning that Bernie Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme, yet the SEC (which had ties to Madoff and his family) ignored the obvious red flags. In the end, Madoff's kids turned him in."
"I have stressed the expanded role that insurance companies would play in a truly voluntary society. For example, if an oil company wanted to drill offshore, the relevant property owners would probably require contractual guarantees of indemnification in the event of a spill. (This does not happen in today's world, where the US, state, and local governments control much of the land involved.) Then, major insurance companies would underwrite the process. They would send their inspectors for random spot checks and so forth before issuing a policy that could end up costing them billions."
http://fee.org/th...be-fixed
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 02, 2014
well, and the monopoly is here.

BS!
it will start to interpret the free market principles according to its own rules just for to maximize its profit

If, or until they violate the property rights of others.
The bigger a company is, if it can't use the govt to protect its market share, it will be continuously under pressure to compete.
Coca-cola is becoming quite worried about its market share and the market share of its industry. It seems their customers aren't buying their hype.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
"Last week Coke announced third quarter earnings, and they were down 14%. The CEO admitted he was struggling to find growth for the company as soda sales were flat. U.S. sales of carbonated beverages have been declining for a decade, and Coke has not developed a successful new product line – or market – to replace those declines.

Coke is a victim of changing consumer preferences. "
"Coke leadership relied too much on its past, and failed to recognize that market shifts could affect even the #1 global brand. Coke leaders thought they would be forever relevant by just doing more of what worked before. But they were wrong."
http://www.forbes...vance/2/
Feldagast
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Shabs42: "Show me some examples of extreme conservatives being lynched or beaten and dragged behind a car as blacks and gays have been many times in this country. Those are actual disgusting acts."
-------------------------
Well done, Sir!


How about Martin Luther King, a Republican and I assume conservative, he wasn't lynched or drug behind a car, just assassinated.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Black conservatives, especially female black conservatives are attacked just as viciously, if not more, by 'liberals' as any other conservative.
Conservatism prompts even 'liberals' to judge by the content of character.
Vietvet
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 02, 2014



How about Martin Luther King, a Republican and I assume conservative, he wasn't lynched or drug behind a car, just assassinated.

MLK being a Republican is an urban myth.

What is conservative about over throwing the established order?

http://www.politi...g-jr-wa/

ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 02, 2014
What is conservative about over throwing the established order?

Depends upon the order.

I guess this related to the use of subjective terms. The socialists use 'liberal' or 'progressive' and the anti-socialists use 'conservative' or let themselves be called 'conservative'.
The most appropriate use of conservative is the anti-socialists want to conserve the US Constitution's limited govt.
Modern US conservatives want to conserve the US Constitution by opposing the 'liberal', socialist regime.
tritace
Nov 02, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Anarchists are just the people, who dismiss the government in any form.

That IS the literal definition of the term.
But your accusation is not quite accurate.
I support the use of a limited govt. A govt whose sole function is the mutual defense of property rights.
Some like to use Somalia as an example of anarchy. That is, and never has been correct. Somalis have a society with a govt. It's just not the nation-state imposed upon them by the west. It's called Xeer.
All functional societies need rules. All functional societies do not need a formal nation-state.
Eddy Courant
3 / 5 (2) Nov 02, 2014
Nixon knew in '72 that pot shrunk tumors. Then he stopped the research and sealed the results. What kind of president does that? What kind of human? Then this from Reagan:
"I now have absolute proof that smoking even one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-bomb blast." ~ Ronald Reagan

Truth is, "If (Marijuana) were unknown, its discovery would no doubt be hailed as a medical breakthrough. Scientists would praise its potential for treating everything from pain to cancer and marvel at its rich pharmacopoeia; many of whose chemicals mimic vital molecules in the human body." ~The Economist

"Cannabis will one day be seen as a wonder drug, as was penicillin in the 1940s. Like penicillin, herbal marijuana is remarkably nontoxic, has a wide range of therapeutic applications and would be quite inexpensive if it were legal" Lester Grinspoon, Harvard

What's with the Republican Party?

MR166
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
Eddy I have absolutely no problems with Medical Marijuana. It is less harmful and addictive than many prescription drugs.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 02, 2014
MR166, you didn't drink your party's koolaid. You're not a lockstep Republican. Shame on you! (kidding)
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 03, 2014
Eddy I have absolutely no problems with Medical Marijuana. It is less harmful and addictive than many prescription drugs.

What a joke medical mj is.
Decriminalize and be done with it.
Decriminalize means the state can't tax it or control it.
BTW, this should be done with alcohol and tobacco, too.
But will society hold people accountable for abuse?
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
ryggesogn2: "What a joke medical mj is."
------------------------------
Say ryggy, the stuff cures cancer. No joke. Naturally and safely by apoptosis: "The cannabis treatment for cancer is really different than for any other disease, and this is the crux of it… for THCA to fit the CB1 receptor it has to be heated (decarboxylated) to burn off the carboxyl group (COOH). Once the THC hits the receptor, ceramide is released to shred the mitochondria and kill the cancer cell." ~Dennis Hill, Biochemist and cancer survivor.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 03, 2014
The joke is the way it is used to push decriminalization.
Decriminalize and be done with it.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
No joke there either. If that's what it takes to get this falsely maligned ancient panacea legal.
vlaaing peerd
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
Interesting, but a little black and white.

How does this work in countries where the liberals are the conservatives? And how about socialists, social-democrats, greens, christian democrats, social liberals, elder-representative parties, nationalists, republicans, piratists and yes.. even the animal-rights parties?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Nov 03, 2014
No joke there either. If that's what it takes to get this falsely maligned ancient panacea legal.

If one used subterfuge and deception to weak laws to achieve your objective, you weaken all laws.
Everyone winks and nods at 'medical' mj just as the state winks and nods at too many laws.

Why do you want mj 'legal'? Do you want the state to sanction mj and give it a seal of approval?
Decriminalize. The state should be agnostic. But killing someone under the influence cannot be an excuse.
Just as one of the Boston bomber's friends tried to use as a defense for lying to the FBI, "he was too stoned to remember".
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2014
Interesting, but a little black and white.

How does this work in countries where the liberals are the conservatives? And how about socialists, social-democrats, greens, christian democrats, social liberals, elder-representative parties, nationalists, republicans, piratists and yes.. even the animal-rights parties?


What is the objective definition of 'disgust'?
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
"If one used subterfuge and deception to weak laws to achieve your objective, you weaken all laws.
Everyone winks and nods at 'medical' mj just as the state winks and nods at too many laws.
Why do you want mj 'legal'?"
-------------------------
Again, not subterfuge or deception. The stuff's the real deal. Legal or decriminalized. Fine with me. Goes great with morning coffee and pastry. Makes better jeans and t-shirts than cotton. And shrinks tumors overnight. What's not to like?

MR166
4 / 5 (1) Nov 03, 2014
Rygg I can see why you are skeptical about Medical Marijuana. There are too many Dr. Feelgoods out there that are willing to prescribe anything to anyone. But that should not limit it's use for bonafied medical purposes.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Nov 03, 2014
I don't care if mj has any medical benefits.
If the medical mj proponents are soo concerned about just its medical aspects wouldn't they be very supportive of treating it just like any other prescription drug?
Take a walk down Venice Beach and you will find several 'prescription' mj stores. And I guess it's not too difficult to find someone to write out a script for you just for the asking.
The arrangement is a farce.
Decriminalize and be done with it. Stop lying about the intent.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
LOL. Venice Beach? OK. Your point is based on crap. Nothing wrong with that. But elsewhere rygg, the stuff is medical magic and used as such.
howhot2
not rated yet Nov 03, 2014
@R2 is doing all of the shouting but in an empty room. Do you miss me @R2?

Legalize MJ and release all who are in prison based on minor drug infractions. 90% of crime will just disappear. That an keep unwanted births to a minimum oddly enough.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 04, 2014
LOL. Venice Beach? OK. Your point is based on crap. Nothing wrong with that. But elsewhere rygg, the stuff is medical magic and used as such.


The point IS 'medical' mj is a joke, an excuse, to make mj 'legal'.
Why don't the mmm supporters go full bore, stop lying, and demand decriminalization? You get what you want without the lie of a 'prescription'.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 04, 2014
I see what you're trying to say, rygg. But what you suggest has been ongoing since prohibition began in 1937. And to no avail. Medical Marijuana is the new foot in the door that is finally changing things here in the 21st century.
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 04, 2014
Do you like irony, rygg? It was a lie that criminalized pot in the first place. In 1937. It is a lie that pot is and has been a Schedule 1 drug. So now it is a lie, at least according to you, that pot is becoming legal once more. Where's your sense of humor?
Noumenon
2 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2014
@R2 is doing all of the shouting but in an empty room.


Then that must make you a nobody. :)
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2014
It was a lie that criminalized pot in the first place.

Fix it.
The best way to change a law is to vigorously enforce it.
Medical Marijuana is the new foot in the door

By using deception.
And, I believe it 'safety' is over hyped and just another deception. 'What a tangled web you weave when at first you practice to deceive."
Just as people have the right to drink Clorox, they have the right to smoke dope. Clorox is not illegal to drink and is cheap.
Eddy Courant
5 / 5 (1) Nov 04, 2014
Now you're equating Clorox with Cannabis? You're embarrassing yourself. Stop it. Do some reading. You'll be glad you did.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2014
Now you're equating Clorox with Cannabis? You're embarrassing yourself. Stop it. Do some reading. You'll be glad you did.

Why?
You have already admitted you must use deception to get what you claim to want, access to dangerous drugs/poison.
"Marijuana candies, sold on the street as 'Uncle Tweety's Chewy Flipper' and 'Gummy Satans' are taking the country by storm. Each candy is an emulsification of sweetened Jello, vodka and minced marijuana. Huffington Post reports that within a week, 9 college students have died from these marijuana candies."
http://topekasnew...achella/
"OLATHE, Colo. - Police say two students at Olathe High School have been taken to a hospital after eating marijuana-infused edibles and another student is under investigation."
http://www.theden...-edibles
Darwin Award candidates. Clorox, thc, rat poison, ....
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2014
Add a few drops of Clorox water and it can make the water safer to drink by killing bacteria.
Too high a concentration will kill.
Chug a bottle of 95% ethanol and likely die if you don't vomit.
How is this any different than thc?
Eddy Courant
5 / 5 (3) Nov 04, 2014
Say goodbye to any cred you may have had, ryggesogn2. LOL
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Nov 04, 2014
Dosage makes the poison.
Do the potheads here assert any level of thc is safe and will never cause any harm?
"Young adults who occasionally smoke marijuana show abnormalities in two key areas of their brain related to emotion, motivation, and decision making, raising concerns that they could be damaging their developing minds at a critical time, according to a new study by Boston researchers."
"We've known that people who use marijuana when they're younger tend to have cognitive abnormalities, but this gives us direct evidence," he said.

"It's fairly reasonable to draw the conclusion now that marijuana does alter the structure of the brain, as demonstrated in this study," Gitlow said, "and that structural alteration is responsible, at least to some degree, for the cognitive changes we have seen in other studies."

Earlier research has shown different brain changes linked to alcohol or other drug use, such as cocaine."
http://www.bostonglobe.com
Eddy Courant
not rated yet Nov 04, 2014
Say rygg, according to your study there, the citizens of WA and CO should be jamming the ER's across both states. Where are they?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 04, 2014
Pot heads just can't admit the dangers of thc.
Decriminalize pot and be honest about the science.
barakn
5 / 5 (3) Nov 05, 2014
...says the guy that linked to a website that also featured stories headlined "Is It Time For America To Finally Nuke Russia?" and "3 Day Old McDonald's Food Sprouts Legs, Has Fight To the Death." Just what made you think http://topekasnews.com was a legitimate news site? Is it because you are an idiot?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 05, 2014
No comment about the story the 'liberal' Boston Globe?

Attack the messenger when you can't refute the message.

Decriminalize and stop lying about the danger of thc.
barakn
5 / 5 (1) Nov 05, 2014
You didn't link to the story, you linked to the Boston Globe front page, which of course was dominated by election news. But back to the other one - you claimed your info was coming from Huffpo but wrote "9 college students have died from these marijuana candies," information which didn't come from Huffpo and which is totally false. Apologize for spreading misinformation.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Nov 05, 2014
You didn't link to the story,

I ran out of characters.
Google the story if you want to read it.
"A recent spousal murder case is the second death this year linked to edible marijuana, sparking questions and concern about what role, if any, the drug played."
http://www.9news....7849283/
Any apology should be from the pot-heads who assert thc is safe, which is in opposition to the science.

Interesting how 'liberals' ignore science on thc, gmo and vaccines.
Modernmystic
5 / 5 (1) Nov 05, 2014
Absolute bunk.

I was a communist at 18, I was a firebrand conservative and fundamentalist christian at 23, I became an anarchist-capitalist at 25, I mellowed to a libertarian at 30ish and now I'm atheist and generally a pacifist and don't fit into ANY box that people like to generalize other people into.

Human politics is just a tad more complicated than your level of disgust to specific images.

Oh, my parents are dyed in the wool democrats...
erson
Nov 05, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
erson
Nov 05, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Nov 05, 2014
Reading mm's story I was thinking of someone so open minded his brain fell out.
vlaaing peerd
not rated yet Nov 07, 2014
Interesting, but a little black and white.

How does this work in countries where the liberals are the conservatives? And how about socialists, social-democrats, greens, christian democrats, social liberals, elder-representative parties, nationalists, republicans, piratists and yes.. even the animal-rights parties?


What is the objective definition of 'disgust'?


what is your point, don't fancy freedom of choice over a perpetual relay of conservative and really-really-conservative politics?
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (2) Nov 07, 2014
The point?
What is an objective definition of 'disgust'?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.