Why elites tend left

[cema]

Удивительный текст. Никто из моих левых друзей не считает себя выше прочих, насколько мне известно. (Разве что в интеллектуальном плане, но на это бывают основания.) И к власти не стремятся.

Про генетическую предрасположенность к политическим предпочтениям я читал и раньше, тот текст был куда более наукообразным. А этот — простая партийная публицистика.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Are you lacking the ability to understand language by nature or by nurture? Just in case, I'll say it again without being deliberately inflammatory. :) There is no need for the Higher Morals for people who are capable of introspection. Whatever you deem "evil" is merely useless for people who can think several steps ahead. Has it ever occurred to you that atheists behave in a decent manner just because it is more convenient to them? And that the religious types will always find some excuse to kill, to steal or to engage in any other mortal sin and to feel good after it whenever they need to? After all, it is only the religous types who could have the temerity to come up with "there is no atonement without sin, there is no salvation without atonement". By the way, have you ever checked the crime rates in the increasingly secular Europe and in the "God-fearing" United States?

By the way, never think bad of anyone - do not spoil your karma. Who knows, what if your Judeo-Christian ideas about the Supreme are wrong, and there is a karmic cycle instead?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

This is exactly what I said. You lack morals.
Which point you very well illustrated with bigoted generalizations about religious people who are all thiefs and murderers.
And, yes, I understood - you are actually proud of having no morals.
Which morals you do not need. Because, as you explained, the current system of laws ensures that you will follow the rules out of fear of punishment.

Luckily for the rest of us - lack of morals goes hand in hand with cowardice.

[(Anonymous)]

One cannot lack something he does not need. That is the religious types who need morals (aka fear of God - you see, they openly acknowledge that they follow the rules out of fear of punishment, there is no shame in that) to keep them from killing and stealing. Luckily for the rest of us, the adherence to so-called morals goes hand in hand with cowardice as well.

It would have been a draw, if not for the Ockam's razor. Why bother inventing morals if simple cowardice works just as well?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

Ok, ok, I got it - you do not need morals.
You have fear of punishment. Got to be sufficient.

Geeez!!

[(Anonymous)]

Being in denial is so comforting, isn't it?

You poor soul cannot even fathom that some people behave not because of the fear of punishment (worldly or other-worldly - does not matter), but for other reasons.

[cema.livejournal.com]

Like, the morals?

An example, if you have one?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

I can see only few reasons why someone will not kill another person (in no particular order):

1. You like that other person.
2. You need that other person.
3. You are afraid of punishment.
4. Your belief system says that The Great Moral Law of Nature prohibits it. It is Wrong to kill.

Which one is it? Or - do you have another one? My poor soul would be interested to learn something new. Let's hear it.

Re: An example, if you have one?

[ktotam.livejournal.com]

maybe
n. you believe that the world as a whole would be better (=more convenient) for you to live in if the people would not kill each other indiscriminately?
like keeping to the right lane on a highway when it's free even if there's no police around.

Re: An example, if you have one?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

This is not "n". This is strict #4 - all the way. You just expressed believe that no-killing makes World Better. No because we are not killing some particularly useful guy. But simply - anybody.

As for keeping in the right lane - I do it not because the World Will Be Better, but for much more practical reasons - to avoid certain dangers.