Why does it seem that alleged conservatives — whether they’re Supreme Court justices, Senators, or even Popes — become more liberal, while alleged liberals rarely become more conservative?
In the case of people caught up in Washington, D.C., I think D.C. culture is partly to blame. As successful, ambitious people, our alleged conservatives want to go to all the nice parties and meet other powerful people, which means they have to cozy up to the dominant culture, which is decidedly and aggressively liberal. These weak conservatives find that when they do the liberals’ bidding, they get praise from all these powerful, glittery people. It goes to their heads.
Just think how much Washington loved John McCain every time he bucked the conservative agenda.
That phenomenon isn’t limited to local cultures. People who want to “be somebody” know they need to make the right friends, and the right friends are part of the dominant culture, which at this point in history is liberal. (I suspect that the dominant culture — among the elites — is usually liberal, but I don’t know that for sure.)
… accommodation appeals to those who seek a seat at the table among society’s elite. (From The Failure of Evangelical Elites)
In my early teen years, my brother was part of a university club that re-enacted Medieval battles. I’d go along, because (1) it was really cool, (2) it was a chance to hang out with college kids (including college girls), and (3) sometimes there was beer. But this necessarily included going out in public — or maybe into a McDonald’s — while wearing a costume, which was weird. People would stare. Some people would laugh.
You had to develop a thick skin and get over it.
That is not (usually) in the nature of people who try to win public approval to get elected for office, or, generally speaking, in people who are very ambitious. Their M.O. is to fit in. To win friends in the right places. The idea of sticking out in a weird, unconventional way is horrifying to them.
If you want to be a conservative in today’s world, you need to accept that the glitterati aren’t going to like you. If you don’t have the courage to do something that will make the cheerleaders not want to be seen with you, you have no chance.
There’s a line here, of course. You have to care what other people think to a certain extent, or else you’re a psychopath. But if you’re not willing to be weird, not willing to be an outcast, not willing to stand on your own, you will cave to the elites.
QUOTE: Why does it seem that alleged conservatives — whether they’re Supreme Court justices, Senators, or even Popes — become more liberal, while alleged liberals rarely become more conservative?
Research findings say this relative to your thoughts…
“Consistent with previous research but contrary to folk wisdom, our results indicate that political attitudes are remarkably stable over the long term. In contrast to previous research, however, we also find support for folk wisdom: on those occasions when political attitudes do shift across the life span, liberals are more likely to become conservatives than conservatives are to become liberals, suggesting that folk wisdom has some empirical basis even as it overstates the degree of change”.
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/706889
As well, Pew Research has done studies that seem to align with the aforementioned results.
That said, anecdotally, we see people go in both directions. For instance, Ronald Regan, Elizabeth Dole, Leon Panetta, Jefferson Van Drew and Brandon Straka (founder of #Walkaway movement) were once Democrats but became noted Republicans. As well, Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, David Weissman were once Republicans but became noted Democrats.
*CORRECTION*
Leon Panetta was once Republican but switched to Democrat
Interesting, but I’d like to see more targeted information, specifically about the elite, and about people in Washington, D.C. and other power centers.
It’s folk wisdom that people get more conservative as they get older. But that’s across the board. I would like to see a study of how people change once they get power.
According to political records, the following represents politicians that switched parties while in office:
Federal
· 22 switched from Democrat to Republican
· 6 switched from Republican to Democrat/Progressive
State
· 55 switched from Democrat to Republican
· 23 switched from Republican to Democrat
Local
· 4 switched from Democrat to Republican
· 3 switched from Republican to Democrat
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_politicians_who_switched_parties_in_office
No US President has switched parties while in office. Yet, during their political careers some have switched. For example, Regan was a Democrat who switched to Republican. As well, Trump has bounced around like a basketball, but was once a Democrat and ended up a Republican.
As I said previously, research indicates changing parties seems to be the exception to the rule but when it happens, the trend tends to go from Democrat to Republican, not the inverse.
Once again, interesting, and somewhat on point, but not quite.
I used to read a political index (I think it was in National Journal) that gave every candidate a political score. What I would want to see was how politicians’ scores changed over their years in Washington. Did people tend to become more conservative or more liberal?
Changing parties is not quite the same, since that would assume that the parties are representative of liberal and conservative, which is not true.
Then, I’d say you’d need to provide information that substantiates your views. Seems much of the general data doesn’t support it.
That said, what I’d want to know from a political index is the criteria and who’s making the assessment. People have varying standards as to what “they” would consider conservative or liberal. For instance, if you asked the average Trump supporter, they’d likely say someone like Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney weren’t conservatives.
The problem, as you note, is that what is considered liberal or conservative changes over time, and people don’t all agree on it at any given point in time. I don’t know exactly how National Journal (if it was them) picked their scale, but at least it was a scale — an attempt to quantify where different legislators existed on the political divide.
I suppose there should be several different ways to measure conservative and liberal. One of those measurements should be based on public perception. If the public believes something is “conservative,” then it’s conservative. Another measurement might be formulated by political experts, or historians. Or even (gasp) by the media.
And you’re wrong. I don’t need to provide any information that substantiates my views, especially when I present something as “it seems this way.”
This whole idea of providing evidence to substantiate a position is like proof-texting. You can find arguments from good sources going 14 different ways, and it’s a fool’s errand to try to wade through it all.
Just this morning I had a discussion with my wife about whether dented cans are safe. You can quickly go down a rabbit hole trying to find the answer, and people online will take very strident positions one way or the other. Life is too short to bother with such nonsense. Just listen to what the USDA says and get on with your life.
And on this topic — whether politicians move left or right when they come to Washington — there is nothing even approaching a competent authority on the subject.
There are certainly cultural shifts that require adjustments emotionally, intellectually, and in just about every other way. I recently told a so-called conservative on Facebook that his love of heavy metal music would have been unthinkable among conservatives in the early days of that music. I grew up in a world where a lot of rock music was associated with drugs or even branded as satanic by a lot of people who deem themselves conservative. Or just think about how they used to call gays “perverts,” not just in private, but in the naked public square. I even know some throwbacks who regard it as conservative to reject interracial marriage. So if you attach yourself to a conservatism of, say, 1980, it will look like many of your fellow ideologues are abandoning your ideology.
@Robin, yes, “conservative” has changed a lot over the years.
QUOTE: One of those measurements should be based on public perception. If the public believes something is “conservative,” then it’s conservative. Another measurement might be formulated by political experts, or historians. Or even (gasp) by the media.
I’m not confident in public perception on this topic especially in this hyper-partisan environment. For instance, there’s a swath of people who still believe Trump will soon be reinstated…despite multiple false alarms. These folks consider themselves to be true conservatives and anyone that doesn’t ’t agree with them are libs (that need to be owned).
Albeit not a panacea, a blend of views from political pundits and historians would likely be better. At least there’s the possibility the criteria would be grounded in fact and has some measurable aspects to it (even if it evolves over time).
QUOTE: And you’re wrong. I don’t need to provide any information that substantiates my views, especially when I present something as “it seems this way.”
Maybe I should have said that you should provide information that substantiates your views if you want your views to be perceived as credible…especially when even common folk wisdom tends to be contrary to your suppositions.