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.
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.
That’s because when talking to tribalist types, you’re seen as either with them or against them and in a system with 2 political parties “against them” means “supporting the other guys”.
There is no independent thinking amongst the “party supporter” masses, only following and parroting of the party messages, so the idea of somebody being a genuinely independent thinker guided by personal principles rather than following some tribe or other is anathema to them.
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.
conflate liberal/conservative with the dominant left/right parties in these nations
Why do so many people on Lemmy insist on pretending that liberal/conservative aren’t relative terms?
Every single time those words get used with their little l/c to mean "relatively liberal/conservative) I see multiple people go “well ackshully a Liberal is a right wing ideology!”
The actual opposite of conservative in this case would be progressive. Liberal isn’t a relative term, progressive is. It’s easy enough to tell from context but when there’s already no info on how these graphs came to be it just adds to them being questionable.
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.
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
A few folks have mentioned that these charts
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/
Exactly. I would be almost as upset with being classified as a liberal or a Democrat as I would be a conservative.
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.
I get classified as all three depending on who I’m talking to.
That’s because when talking to tribalist types, you’re seen as either with them or against them and in a system with 2 political parties “against them” means “supporting the other guys”.
There is no independent thinking amongst the “party supporter” masses, only following and parroting of the party messages, so the idea of somebody being a genuinely independent thinker guided by personal principles rather than following some tribe or other is anathema to them.
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.
Why do so many people on Lemmy insist on pretending that liberal/conservative aren’t relative terms?
Every single time those words get used with their little l/c to mean "relatively liberal/conservative) I see multiple people go “well ackshully a Liberal is a right wing ideology!”
The actual opposite of conservative in this case would be progressive. Liberal isn’t a relative term, progressive is. It’s easy enough to tell from context but when there’s already no info on how these graphs came to be it just adds to them being questionable.
And no way the UK is left leaning like that.
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.
Oh hell nah, I’m independent and I am definitely an embarassed left leaning voter
Edit: read Jane Jacobs system of survival
deleted by creator
Have you read it? Don’t judge too quickly!Actually on second thought nvm. If that’s you’re response then I’m out :)
deleted by creator
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
Why?