More dataisdepressing than dataisbeautiful
Difficult to assess this info without knowing how the data was created.
So here’s the question - is the scale consistent over time? That is, do we consider the same ideas left/right wing in 202x as we did in 199x?
Let’s assume it is. We’re seeing men lean towards the center/right, and a lot of people are asking why. The trouble is, the answer isn’t one people like to hear - in our headlong pursuit of equity, we’re introducing a lot of inequality. You lift the ladies up, while you let the men climb - all based on the assumption that the women had further to climb so what you’re doing is levelling the field.
Countering this is a sympathetic voice, one offering to bring back equality or offer a different kind of equity. Casting gender equity as a zero sum game, and pushing for equality aimed at the ones not being lifted up.
I often hear the “uneducated men” argument, but that’s just an ugly echo from the past serving those it once oppressed in a bitter irony. The reality is that even educated people can fall for propaganda. Especially when voting in what they see as their own self interest.
in our headlong pursuit of equity,
Where the hell do you live where there has been a headlong pursuit for equity/equality?
Hey can you pls give me the source? I want to look into that.
Interestingly it looks like in 3 of 4 charts men have, at worst, returned to mean. It’s the women getting more leftist. And I don’t blame them.
I believe that a significant factor for this can be attributed to mental development and maturity of boys lagging behind that of girls of the same age, during formative years. And, please read on, if you assume my argument is “boys dumb, conservatives dumb. Q.E.D.”
The second factor is an education system where this offset in mental development/maturity is further confounded. Boys don’t typically do as well, because sitting idle and being a “good boy”, is more challenging. This leads to a path for boys to start working earlier, while girls get higher degrees. (I assume the trends for higher education by gender, to be similar, if not, then that can falsify this hypothesis).
What a person then observes they get from society, vs what you pay in terms of taxes, is skewed between these two groups, and highly correlated with gender.
If this hypothesis has any validity to to it, then one could argue that a way to mitigate this is by correcting the negative causes. Perhaps most the most fundamental root cause can be improved by revisiting how education is failing boys in particular.
The challenge with this is that if the conservative parties’ policies are driven by what can make more people vote conservative, then this will have a negativt spiralling effect. The worse you make it for a certain group of people that vote for you, the more that group is willing to vote for you.
Conservative being down is a good presentation choice.
From a personal point of view, I agree, but playing devil’s advocate, really the chart should be flipped so that the left/rightness is shown that way and the dates are on the vertical axis.
It’d also be good if the time periods matched, and if there was a source for the data.
Hey look if you start taking away white male privilege they freak out when they find out people of other races, genders and creeds are better than them, who knew?
When I think of all the women & girls in my life that I care about, I remember that I could never be a conservative. It would be a betrayal.
Assuming this is accurate, I’m pleased to see men in the UK bucking the trend.
A few folks have mentioned that these charts
- conflate liberal/conservative with the dominant left/right parties in these nations
- does not include people who do not identify with one of those dominant parties
- have some somewhat unreliable stats magic behind them
A lot of young men in the US are reporting themselves as “not a Democrat or Republican”, and that’s causing a lot of this proportional shift. I would bet that characterizes a lot of folks on this site who are not conservative.
https://www.vox.com/politics/2024/3/13/24098780/politics-gender-divide-generation-z-youth-men-women
https://www.allendowney.com/blog/2024/01/28/is-the-ideology-gap-growing/
Those ‘unaffiliated’s are just embarrassed republicans. Just like most of the centrists you’ll run across.
In the UK, where there actually is a centralist party, most of the “centralists” don’t actually vote for them. Which really tells you everything you need to know about centralism. It’s not a political ideology, it’s just a refusal to engage.
On the flip side, in Europe extreme right parties are mostly being propped up by young men, while in other age groups men and women vote relatively similarly, which supports this finding.
Exactly. I would be almost as upset with being classified as a liberal or a Democrat as I would be a conservative.
I get classified as all three depending on who I’m talking to.
At the same time I know many people (my brother included) that claim to be “independent” because they think that the trump camp is somehow outside the conservative camp, and therefore respond “independent” on polls. Because they think “I’m not democrat or conservative, I just want to drain the swamp” and then support trump, who is literally a swamp.
Edit: read Jane Jacobs system of survival
Why?
This is your brain on idealism, just pure vibes. Political astrology.
Have you read it? Don’t judge too quickly!Actually on second thought nvm. If that’s you’re response then I’m out :)
No, but like… dude, you could flip half of those supposed traits between categories and it would read exactly the same. That’s why I called it astrology.
Perhaps you just did a bad job of presenting the book’s ideas, but I’ve just read through a summary of it and it didn’t exactly make me reconsider my knee jerk reaction.
Thanks for explaining. I did a bad job explaining it, but I’m only taking a short break irl and am just jumping into this conversation. I’ve removed that section of my comment.
The book explains this in more detail and I recommend it. We don’t get much deep discussion into what it means to be conservative/liberal and the purpose of the book isn’t to go into that but it does provide a framework. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs
But now your comment is just “here’s 10 hour read that explains everything, I will not elaborate” like in this post: https://sh.itjust.works/post/26206134
You can at least leave info about what it should explain, at best you can summarise, but it is possible that you will not persuade people to read that.
From the wiki page, it looks like the idea behind the book is viable, but nothing is scientific about it, no research, no further developments, it’s just how the author sees the system work. This may be insightful but should be taken with a large grain of salt
What the fuck South Korea? Also you just know that sudden rise in liberal men in the UK is the Tories’ doing.
SK is wild right now. Women are taking part in the 4B movement (no dating, sex, childbirth, or marriage. The Korean words start with “B”). There was a online feminist group that got people so heated they thought they were sneaking hand signals into “male” media and they were getting people fired. If certain characters didn’t come out with risqué enough clothing, male netizens would blame some secret feminist in the company. Women are assaulted if they’re confused for a feminist due to just their hairstyle. A book (“Kim Jiyoung 1989” I think) that is, like, baby’s first feminist literature, can have your spouse leave you. Men say you can’t date a woman whose read it. All the book is about is the subtle sexism women face. They have an epidemic of “molka,” which are secret cameras in women’s bathrooms among other places. Women tell each other to bring nail polish to paint over the screws to protect themselves. Their new president is looking to abolish the gender equality ministry and blames feminism for the low birth rate.
TL;DR: Yeah, it’s pretty bad over there right now.
Holy fuck. There are legitimately third world countries better than this what the fuck.
oh yeah, South Korea has gone off the rails recently. lots of news stories about men assaulting women for the assumption that they’re feminists, anti-woman politicians being elected, women losing their jobs for being (or assumed to be) feminists, it’s all Very Not Good.
Anti-feminism has taken a huge hold in SK. it’s partially related to the draft, but that’s nothing new. women have been getting increased respect over the past decades, esp in sharp contrast to the pre-war era when women didnt even deserve names beyond “X’s mom”.
the situation for women is actually improving a lot here, in many ways better than in other developed nations. consider it just one last baby whine
The Tories are really good at convincing people to hate them, fuck the Tories
It’s very easy because the Tories have recently decided that the reason people don’t like them is because they’re not fascist enough, so they’ve doubled down and decided to be more fascist. At least trying to be, but it’s difficult to be fascist when you lost power due to being awful fascists.
Weirdly people didn’t want that, and so now they’re even less popular.
I HATE THE LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE DICHOTOMY
I HATE THE LIBERAL/CONSERVATIVE DICHOTOMY
A better voting system than First Past The Post is proven to create less of a divide between parties and supports either new parties forming, making existing parties more likely to work together on bi-partisan goals, as well as bringing existing parties more towards the center.
I’d be curious to see data outside of the “International Community”
Martian politics, interesting
What’s the source? I wanna learn about the weird unexpected drops in some countries.
For anyone else also interested, I went and had a look at the links Dessalines kindly provided.
The source on the graphs says “Sources: Daniel Cox, Survey Center on American Life; Gallup Poll Social Series; FT analysis of General Social Surveys of Korea, Germany & US and the British Election Study. US data is respondent’s stated ideology. Other countries show support for liberal and conservative parties All figures are adjusted for time trend in the overall population.” Where FT is financial times.
It’s not clear how the words “liberal” and “conservative” were chosen, whether they’re intended to mean “socially progressive” and “socially traditional” or have other connotations bound with the political parties too, and whether the original data chose those descriptions or if they’re FT’s inference as being “close enough” for an American audience.
Unfortunately the FT data site is refusing to let me look at them without “legitimate interest” advertising cookies so I can’t tell you much more or if there’s any detail on methodology.
🌳 Die? No. We lost them, and now we cannot find them.
Now I hear Treebeard whining about modern females and how none of them want to be Entwives for alpha Ents
If you read the books, you’ll find that you’re not far off.
