Often science confirms the intuitively obvious. For example (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2325414/Men-physically-strong-likely-right-wing-political-views.html):
Men who are strong are more likely to take a right-wing stance, while weaker men support the welfare state, researchers claim.
Their study discovered a link between a man’s upper-body strength and their political views.
Scientists from Aarhus University in Denmark collected data on bicep size, socio-economic status and support for economic redistribution from hundreds in America, Argentina and Denmark.
The figures revealed that men with higher upper-body strength were less likely to support left-wing policies on the redistribution of wealth.
Again we see that liberalism is the ideology of weaklings, a tool by which the 90-lb. coward can use the State to seize the property of those he resents but dare not try to compete with fairly.
Take heart, moonbats. Maybe there is hope. Rigorous exercise might help you strengthen your bodies to the point that you no longer feel so powerless and pathetic as to need to identify with authoritarian government. Then your character might become strong as well.(http://moonbattery.com/charles_atlas_ad.jpg)
Fortunately Joe turned to Charles Atlas instead of liberalism.
I do not agree with the premise. I think to simplify it one more step is more accurate. Strong, confident people, are natural conservatives, whether physically strong, mentally strong, or some combination thereof. When one has the intellect to know how the world really works, one is conservative. How one knows that matters little to none.You can bet Winston Churchill would agree with you.
I do not agree with the premise. I think to simplify it one more step is more accurate. Strong, confident people, are natural conservatives, whether physically strong, mentally strong, or some combination thereof. When one has the intellect to know how the world really works, one is conservative. How one knows that matters little to none.You can bet Winston Churchill would agree with you.
I do not agree with the premise. I think to simplify it one more step is more accurate. Strong, confident people, are natural conservatives, whether physically strong, mentally strong, or some combination thereof. When one has the intellect to know how the world really works, one is conservative. How one knows that matters little to none.
The conclusion that liberals are wimps is appealing but the Daily Mail got it wrong: the actual study results are more complex than that. I found the original research paper on SSRN (both abstract and full text available). The abstract, in full, states:
Over human evolutionary history, upper body strength has been a major component of fighting ability. Evolutionary models of animal conflict predict that actors with greater fighting ability will more actively attempt to acquire or defend resources than less formidable contestants. Here, we apply these models to political decision-making about redistribution of income and wealth among modern humans. In studies conducted in Argentina, Denmark and the U.S., men with greater upper body strength more strongly endorsed the self-beneficial position: Among men of lower socioeconomic status (SES), strength predicted increased support for redistribution; among men of higher SES, strength predicted increased opposition to redistribution. As personal upper body strength is irrelevant to payoffs from economic policies in modern mass democracies, the continuing role of strength suggests that modern political decision-making is shaped by an evolved psychology designed for small-scale groups.[Emph. added]
In other words, the study concludes that (a) strong upper-class men oppose redistribution but (b) strong lower-class men support it (think of the stereotypical Marxist/union thugs).
......Put another way, this study says that liberals are a coalition of rich wimpy men and strong poor men. By contrast, conservatives are a coalition of rich strong men and poor weak men.
They need a study for this?
They need a study for this?
You just gotta bet some scrawny weasel got a grant to study the obvious..
And fortunately the Left has made it so that our civilian foes will need to "hire it done" once the civil war breaks out...since they shake, shiver and wet themselves at the very sight of a gun...even if they pick one up, they'll not handle it too well...so we got that going for ourselves.
;)
And fortunately the Left has made it so that our civilian foes will need to "hire it done" once the civil war breaks out...since they shake, shiver and wet themselves at the very sight of a gun...even if they pick one up, they'll not handle it too well...so we got that going for ourselves.
;)
Oh, they will get over that quick enough when they can't eat - and we know philosophically they have no regard for the lives of others (unless they can pretend to be saving them while putting out little or no effort) so killing is going to come more naturally to them than to us. If they can be in a group of 20 thugs (A community!) who will press upon the necks of the Bitter clingers, and this also results in them getting food, they will be happy to sign up. They will be too cowardly and lazy to attack hard targets, but will happily victimize the disarmed and weak. Its what Liberals do. Hitler built his army from liberals feeling special about themselves.