Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–229 of 229 posts

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#221

Post by internaut »

Joof wrote: post #211
internaut wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a potential fallacy that should be evident that you can not necessarily and simply equate more education with always producing the correct perspectives and therefore liberal view points are the correct positions. This. If there existed a world in which only liberals were right all the time conservatism would have been selected out of the gene pool by now. That's not a metaphor. Political tribes have been b…

Honestly, there is too much world for 2 true paths. A multiparty system sounds nice from here.

Even this is probably not enough.

Republicanism is definitely on its way out as a way to structure human governance.

It's the same problem that caused the Boston Tea Party. Increasing lack of representativeness. I think it has taken the full powers of the media to synchronize the people this far but with the Net there is too much dissenting opinion, too much expression for a party system to work.

If the Net generation was represented in parliament, then political parties would have a half-life similar to Boy Bands.

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#222

Post by ArkyBeagle »

tim333 wrote: post #207
ArkyBeagle wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're wrong ( and oh so many are ) , "Adam Smith's sycophants" have a fundamental reading comprehension problem. He's nominally a tepid-right, Virginia school economist, but Russ Roberts frames "Wealth of Nations" as a drill down of "Theory of Moral Sentiments". Smith spends barrels of ink decrying rents. Many, many people who espouse Smith just cherry-pick reinforcement from him. Now: having said that, I am no…

In practice altering the distribution of wealth and income doesn't usually involve taking from A and giving to B. It usually is more taking from the rich and spending the money on free education and the like. You can also put taxes on large estates, give subsidised houses / loans to the less well off and so on. There used to be quite a lot of that between WW2 and Thatcher getting in in the UK with tax rates as high a…

In general, if you subsidize something you get more of it and it costs more. Of course there may be some odd current in the river which makes this untrue - an example is bulk grain subsidies in the US, which prices risk of underproduction way down. IMO, this is like "if you need 4 GB RAM , get 8 just to be safe".

Indeed, in both housing and in education, we've subsidized it, there is more of it and it costs more.

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#223

Post by back_beyond »

back_beyond wrote: post #60

The highly educated can afford to be liberal. This demographic tends to be wealthier. Greater wealth means less required assistance and, therefore, greater opportunity to advocate on the behalf of others. Such is my experience.

However, that isn't to say it's the sole factor. Not by a long ways.

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#225

Post by fab13n »

lujim wrote: post #178
fab13n wrote: post #72

I'm an upper-middle class, over-educated professional expert, and I'm strongly liberal for selfish reasons: mostly, I want to live in a climate of social peace, and would prefer to be surrounded by people who foster a mood of solidarity and benevolence, rather than a cut-throat and ever-worsening competitive mindset. So sure, one way is to protect myself and those I love behind a gated community. But that's pretty mu…

You're also devastatingly modest ;)

Actually, I believe the description I gave of myself to match that of most of the left-leaning, >30yo HN commenters:-)

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#226

Post by fab13n »

coupdetaco wrote: post #205
fab13n wrote: post #72

I'm an upper-middle class, over-educated professional expert, and I'm strongly liberal for selfish reasons: mostly, I want to live in a climate of social peace, and would prefer to be surrounded by people who foster a mood of solidarity and benevolence, rather than a cut-throat and ever-worsening competitive mindset. So sure, one way is to protect myself and those I love behind a gated community. But that's pretty mu…

Natural laws are the same as God given laws

Only if God exists, which is highly debatable and highly debated.

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#227

Post by kilotaras »

ArkyBeagle wrote: post #222
tim333 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice altering the distribution of wealth and income doesn't usually involve taking from A and giving to B. It usually is more taking from the rich and spending the money on free education and the like. You can also put taxes on large estates, give subsidised houses / loans to the less well off and so on. There used to be quite a lot of that between WW2 and Thatcher getting in in the UK with tax rates as high a…

In general, if you subsidize something you get more of it and it costs more. Of course there may be some odd current in the river which makes this untrue - an example is bulk grain subsidies in the US, which prices risk of underproduction way down. IMO, this is like "if you need 4 GB RAM , get 8 just to be safe". Indeed, in both housing and in education, we've subsidized it, there is more of it and it costs more.

>in both housing and in education, we've subsidized it, there is more of it and it costs more.

What about all of Europe that has almost free education?

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#228

Post by norea-armozel »

I would say that I'm liberal, but not what most people consider liberal by some standards since my politics are closer to mutualism crossed with geolibertarianism. So, I get the occasional "huh" from people when explaining what govt policies I support like LVT, promotion of unions and/or worker owned businesses, and the like.

Re: Why Are the Highly Educated So Liberal?

#229

Post by vlehto »

internaut wrote: post #189
perilous333 wrote: post #5

There is a curious (albeit incomplete) parallel here to Moldbug's theory of the five castes of the United States.

Funny you should mention He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, because in this very thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11829796 I love watching Mr Bug's thought percolate through the Net. I can only imagine this is what it must have been like for the first proto-Communists as Karl Marx went to town.

I kind of went to deep end of the pool. The dude points out widely believed lies. The argues that because they we're lies, complete opposite must be true. And because you believe opposite is true, then you ought to take opposite political stance than the lying people.

But because the opposite is weak ass conservative party that only defines itself as opposite of the democratic party, you need to go back in time to find genuine alternative.

So you go back to monarchists. Which surprisingly fits snuggly with hard core libertarian views. Libertarian monarchism with attitude of "Lets cut the crap, someone is anyhow pulling all the strings, might as well be public knowledge. It's going to be pretty much like nowadays, except you're not going to be lied to."

The whole thing is incredibly anglocentric, mostly doesn't take into account geopolitics and gets into weirdly pacifist streak. Which only suits monarchism if you pick the period of 1840 - 1910. (As if war/violence is the only problem of human kind.)

It's exactly what U.S. needs if it's going to follow the footsteps of roman republic. You guys are still way too fervent with this democracy thing if you aim for Imperial future.

Post reply on HN