[extropy-chat] The Psychology of Different Ideologies

[Hal Finney]

I found a blog entry this morning that posed a challenging question:
what is the psychological basis behind different ideologies?  The
author is Randy Barnett, a libertarian and law professor at Boston U.
http://volokh.com/posts/1111522164.shtml discusses an article in the
libertarian magazine Liberty, "Who's Your Daddy? Authority, Asceticism,
and the Spread of Liberty" by Michael Acree, available online at
http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2005_04/acree-daddy.html.

Acree's article presents an analysis of liberalism and conservatism
in psychological terms: conservatives promote government based
morality because of their desires to behave immorally; liberals promote
redistribution out of guilt at their love of material goods.  Acree then
says:

"The various explanations that have been offered mostly boil down to the
contention that people are jerks - consumed by envy, by needs to control
others, or whatever. There is obviously some truth in these claims. The
difficult point about such explanations is the implication that
libertarians are not afflicted with similar character flaws - that we are
more saintly or mentally healthy than the rest of the population. Anyone
who has experience with libertarians in person, however, will have (or
should have) trouble swallowing that conclusion. There must be more to
the story."

However, Barnett (the blogger) finds Acree's analysis of libertarians
wanting, focusing more on mental processes and not so much on the kinds
of psychological factors he brought into play when discussing liberals
and conservatives.  Barnett asks:

"Still, I would be much more interesting in hearing the candid thoughts of
libertarians about their own psychology and that of other libertarians in
ways that are not self-congratulatory, than I am in hearing reactions to
Acree's claims about the psychology of those on the left or right. For
example, if Acree is right that the attractiveness of liberal and
conservative ideologies depends their resemblance to differing parental
models (mother-state or father-state respectively), then what comparable
psychology accounts for libertarians rejection of either parental model?"

The blog comments then offer various responses, most of which are self
congratulatory in exactly the way that Barnett asked people to avoid.
What struck me in reading these comments, in the context of some of
the recent discussions on this list, was how easily people can mislead
themselves.  Ideologues see themselves in morally superior terms,
and the libertarians responding to this blog entry are no exception.
I did think one comment was unusually perceptive, by Don Gwinn:

"If one accepts the thesis that social conservatives are motivated to
stamp out pornography and prostitution by their desire to stamp out
their own sexual excesses, and that fiscal liberals are terrified of
tax cuts because they need to suppress their own fixation on money,
then what is the secret fear/obsession that drives libertarians? ...
[W]hat a libertarian would be suppressing, it seems to me, would be
his conviction that he, and maybe everyone, really is dependent on
outside forces, particularly altruism from government or family. The
libertarian would prefer to believe in the totally self-made man, but
the reason the totally self-made man is celebrated is because he is the
exception. The libertarian believes this, but he doesn't want to believe
it, so he suppresses it by throwing himself into an ideology based on
the idea that self-reliance and the rejection of collective altruism is
the answer to all our ills."

I think this makes a lot of sense and fits much better with the analysis
of the other ideologies.  If the conservative is afraid of his own lusts,
and the liberal is afraid of his own greed, then the libertarian is
afraid of his own dependency.  Each espouses an ideology that promotes
as a virtue exactly the traits which each one fears that he lacks.

I'd suggest that it is helpful for Extropians and other transhumanists to
turn a similar self-critical eye on themselves, at least privately.  These
philosophies are brave and bold in their rejection of the conventions
of the past and their embrace of the possibilities of the future.
We feel pretty good about ourselves by adopting these views.  But can
we take a less self-congratulatory tone and look at our true motivations
more critically?  It can be a good exercise in overcoming the comforting
lies and self-deception that interfere with our perception of the truth.

Hal