Poor yet Conservative: Is it Rational?

[Ever Victorious Iron Willed Commanders]

Socially conservative, yes.

Fiscally conservative, only if it's a certain type.

[36 Camera Perspective]

I'm a poor libertarian. In the long-term, libertarian policies would benefit the poor more than government intervention.

[Ngelmish]

It's inherently rational if it results in political outcomes that the poor person approves of. Of course, whether or not valuing those outcomes, or even prioritizing them, is rational is a whole other question.

[Divitalia]

So what, you can’t have a certain political view if you’re poor?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

There are quite a lot of people who are Conservative and poor, in the US, for example. I myself live in a town in the South where Conservative ideas are held by many wealthy and many poor people alike.

[36 Camera Perspective]

It's inherently rational if it results in political outcomes that the poor person approves of. Of course, whether or not valuing those outcomes, or even prioritizing them, is rational is a whole other question.

Or the whole question of rational egoism.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

All opinions without hard scientific basis are, by definition, irrational. The better question would be 'is irrational actually a bad thing?'.

[Tobleste]

Please, conservatism is a perfectly rational political position.

In general, perhaps, but American 'conservatism' is little more than identity politics.

True. I get why someone would vote conservative in the UK despite being poor because while their policies may hurt the poor in some respects, they still use actual economics and facts to shape their policies and may improve things faster than a Labour government.

In the US however, anyone who is poor and votes republican does so for some combination of these 4 reasons:

1. They hate women and/or abortion.
2. They hate minorities and/or immigrants.
3. They hate gun control or regulation.
4. They hate themselves.

[Tobleste]

It's inherently rational if it results in political outcomes that the poor person approves of. Of course, whether or not valuing those outcomes, or even prioritizing them, is rational is a whole other question.

That's the key question. Voting conservative to stop gay marriage is rational. That doesn't mean hating gay marriage is necessarily rational though.

[36 Camera Perspective]

It's inherently rational if it results in political outcomes that the poor person approves of. Of course, whether or not valuing those outcomes, or even prioritizing them, is rational is a whole other question.

That's the key question. Voting conservative to stop gay marriage is rational. That doesn't mean hating gay marriage is necessarily rational though.

To put another way: rationality tells you what you should do given certain goals, not what goals you should have in the first place.

[Improved werpland]

In terms of living standards for the poor, Republican states aren’t on par with most developed countries IIRC. So I don’t think it’s rational for a poor person looking to improve their standard of living.

[Uxupox]

In general, perhaps, but American 'conservatism' is little more than identity politics.

True. I get why someone would vote conservative in the UK despite being poor because while their policies may hurt the poor in some respects, they still use actual economics and facts to shape their policies and may improve things faster than a Labour government.

In the US however, anyone who is poor and votes republican does so for some combination of these 4 reasons:

1. They hate women and/or abortion.
2. They hate minorities and/or immigrants.
3. They hate gun control or regulation.
4. They hate themselves.

yes yes. i hate minorities so i hate myself. yes yes.

[Telconi]

In terms of living standards for the poor, Republican states aren’t on par with most developed countries IIRC. So I don’t think it’s rational for a poor person looking to improve their standard of living.

Living standards are not simply monetary.

[Improved werpland]

In terms of living standards for the poor, Republican states aren’t on par with most developed countries IIRC. So I don’t think it’s rational for a poor person looking to improve their standard of living.

Living standards are not simply monetary.

They aren’t but liberal states tend to be much better at those other things too. I understand the argument that middle class people are better off in places like Texas, but the same simply isn’t true for the poor.

[Telconi]

Living standards are not simply monetary.

They aren’t but liberal states tend to be much better at those other things too. I understand the argument that middle class people are better off in places like Texas, but the same simply isn’t true for the poor.

Sure it is.

[Improved werpland]

They aren’t but liberal states tend to be much better at those other things too. I understand the argument that middle class people are better off in places like Texas, but the same simply isn’t true for the poor.

Sure it is.

Yes. Who would prefer living in a state where the government wastes TANF money on abstinence programs and cuts aid to the disabled before highway decoration?

[Telconi]

Sure it is.

Yes. Who would prefer living in a state where the government wastes TANF money on abstinence programs and cuts aid to the disabled before highway decoration?

Anyone who likes abstinence programs or highway decorations?

[Improved werpland]

Yes. Who would prefer living in a state where the government wastes TANF money on abstinence programs and cuts aid to the disabled before highway decoration?

Anyone who likes abstinence programs or highway decorations?

Well I’d have to assume they value those two over improving the standing of the poor.

[Telconi]

Anyone who likes abstinence programs or highway decorations?

Well I’d have to assume they value those two over improving the standing of the poor.

Perhaps it is the standing of the poor... As I said, quality of life is not always monetary.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Well I’d have to assume they value those two over improving the standing of the poor.

Perhaps it is the standing of the poor... As I said, quality of life is not always monetary.

Indeed. At times it's also about values and ideology, more so than money.

[Wallenburg]

The OP has nearly nothing to do with the topic title. NSG is not your blog.

[Telconi]

Perhaps it is the standing of the poor... As I said, quality of life is not always monetary.

Indeed. At times it's also about values and ideology, more so than money.

Probably more so about ideology. After all, when adjusted for CoL, most heavy blue areas are not any better off for the average person from a financial standpoint.

[West Leas Oros]

Fiscally conservative or socially conservative?

[Telconi]

Fiscally conservative or socially conservative?

Why not both?

[Sovaal]

At the end of the day most people are irrational regardless of beliefs probably includes me and everyone else on this site.