Let me state from the outset that I am a fan of the thesis
that humans are largely hard wired with a tendency towards conservative or to
liberalism. I’m also a Darwinist, and I like to think myself to be a scientist.
It is my belief that we should be clear about our biases although I hope that
my bias towards science has a moderating effect the others. Mostly, however,
I’m a pragmatist.
There is some evidence for the view that there is a
conservative brain and there is, as Bernardi would call it, a ‘leftie’ brain. However,
it has to be said that in politics at least, there seems to be a greater
tendency towards conservatism than liberalism in these so called leftie groups.
So I am uneasy with distinguishing too sharply between the idea of left and
right in politics. Everyday life is a different matter and the main concern
here.
Like most human traits a person sits on a conservative-leftie
continuum and can either be at the extremes on either end or anywhere in
between. Those at the extremes will almost certainly not change their views, no
matter what the issue. There will be some who will vacillate between a
conservative view and a liberal view depending on the topic: these swingers are
in the middle. Even some clear liberals will have a leaning towards being conservative
on some issues. Genetic predisposition is modified by experience. And, as we
have seen repeatedly, and especially during the last couple of years in
Australia, it can be mediated by the opinions of others-the influential, the media
and our politicians.
Conservative thinking has a habit of appealing to what I
will call the human condition. That is, our predilections to behave in
particular ways. The notion of simplistic solutions is a good example. As
Daniel Kahneman points out in his book, ‘Thinking Fast and Slow’, our natural
tendency is to accept simple explanations and adopt simple solutions even for
complex issues because it takes less effort. If we have to think deeply about
issues we tire easily and experience stress. We are hard wired to seek simple
solutions. You are probably shaking your head in disbelief but there is a ton
of evidence to show that this is true. One result of this tendency is that we
are easily manipulated by the media and politicians. For centuries, before mass
communication we were manipulated by gossip, things we were told, particularly
by those who have influence over us in some way: people we admire or those with
power for example.
One example of simplistic thinking is the way in which
refugees or asylum seekers were demonised by the Murdoch-Abbott consortium in
recent times. Let me also add, for a balanced view, that the solutions offered
by the Rudd and Gillard Governments were no better. The Australian people
bought into the negative and wholly simplistic campaign. ‘Turn back the boats’
is a simplistic solution to a complex humanitarian problem that will have
repercussions for Australia for years to come. It is also a racist position but
more about that later. We like to think we are a fair-minded, liberal people,
but this has been shown to be untrue. We have a conservative mind that is tied
up with our human predilections.
Another example is that most people support the idea that
throwing people in gaol is the cure for bad social behaviour, even though it
has been shown repeatedly not to be a deterrent. Conservative minds are more
likely to stir up public opinion in favour of harsher sentencing and are
usually successful because it appeals to our need for simple solutions-even if
they don’t work. The death penalty, even though most don’t support the idea, is
another fine example of conservative thinking. The same can be said for the
‘war on drugs’. Most people support the idea and are easily stirred up to agree
with the notion that drug takers should go to gaol. But the science shows that
this approach is counterproductive. We know that drug taking, if treated as a
health issue and decriminalised, becomes less of a social and criminal problem.
But this is counter- intuitive to what we like to believe. There are many other
examples of the way in which we are capable of irrational thinking. Kahneman
provides a number of examples if you'd like to look further. We are a very
irrational species despite what we like to think.
Stereotyping is perhaps the most common form of ‘thinking
fast’ or short- circuiting opinion making. Humans are extremely good at this
and, like fast thinking in general, stereotyping makes sense from a biological
point of view. It saves time and energy that can be used for more important
survival activities. Our propensity to stereotype enables us to be easily manipulated
by others including the media and politicians. The media, in fact, deliberately
use certain, often emotional, words and phrases in text and headlines to get us
to think in a certain direction. Recipients of welfare, the poor and socially disadvantaged,
refugees (read illegal immigrants in the right type of newspaper) and, of
course, indigenous people are easily stereotyped in negative terms. Women are
similarly treated, although mostly in more subtle ways.
Humans are naturally racist for, again, good biological
reasons. It takes careful thought and effort for us to overcome this tendency,
and many do. However, the marginalisation of indigenous people and immigrants
in Australian society, is ongoing, despite the best efforts of the more
enlightened. As I mentioned above, the refugee issue is largely a racist issue
and racism, for the time being, has won.
The conservative mind taps into this human predilection and
appeals to people to marginalise minority groups. The conservative mind believes
in survival of the fittest, a white, patriarchal society based on a historical
past, that what happens to us is the result of personal responsibility, laissez-faire
economics, and the cult of the individual, beyond that of community. Couple
this with a Christian moral code (although many conservative minds are not
Christian) and the conservative mind wants faith to intersect with political
policy and to guide societal behaviour in areas such as abortion, homosexuality,
single parent families, same sex marriage, and surrogacy, for example.
The conservative mind, particularly that associated with the
Christian church and the more so the Roman Catholic variety, are anti-science.
The climate change issue is an excellent, but not sole, example. Humans do not
like change and we don’t like fear: both make us very uncomfortable. So, we
eagerly accept the conservative message that everything is all right, that we
don’t need to worry, that the scientists have it all wrong. It means we can
rest easily in our beds with no need to do some difficult things. No need to
change our lifestyle and habits, pay for our profligacy, some uncertainty.
Conservative minds don’t like change and neither do most people, so we are
easily swayed despite the strong science, by single alternative and comforting views:
it’s called cognitive dissonance, if you’d like to read more about it.
Humans are self-interested. Yes, we are community minded but
only in as far as it protects our interests, our family, our off-spring. Belonging
to a group is essential to survival. We are capable of acts of selflessness, although
altruism is based on reciprocity and kinship. So, when we are asked to accept
some changes to our lifestyle because we need to shift from fossil fuels, we
baulk. Taxing the mining industry can easily be turned into a big ogre by
simply talking about the threats to jobs, energy costs and the economy in
general. Humans are easily spooked by change and by a risk to our standard of
living, our self-interest. The conservative mind believes in a laissez-faire
economy. One in which anything goes to promote big business. It is survival of
the fittest. And the conservative mind knows how to manipulate the human need
for self-interest.
It needs to be said that there is nothing wrong with these
human predilections. They are based on reasonable biological drives and it has
not been that long since we were running around in the swamp in small tribes
trying desperately to survive in a harsh environment.
But a civil society exists because people can think through
things like stereotyping, racism, issues of disadvantage. It can only exist
when we stop taking the simple option and recognise that complex problems need
complex solutions, that may not be easy to undertake: that there my be some
pain. For us to have a civil society we need to go beyond the gossip, to seek
out the facts and check sources, to eschew media that manipulates, to challenge
what we hear and see, and to be prepared to change our point of view. It needs
us to go beyond our natural tendencies, to not necessarily buy-in to the
conservative mind.
Wisdom is the capacity to overcome our natural drives and
instincts, to think carefully and compassionately, to challenge ourselves.
