## Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition The study “Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition” by John T. Jost and colleagues (2003) is a landmark meta-analysis that synthesises psychological research on the cognitive and motivational underpinnings of political conservatism. It argues that conservatism is not just a set of political beliefs but also a psychological orientation influenced by specific cognitive and motivational needs. The paper provides insights into why individuals gravitate toward conservative ideologies, particularly in terms of their psychological tendencies. #### Key Arguments and Findings 1. Definition of Political Conservatism The authors define conservatism as an ideological preference for preserving tradition, hierarchy, and stability. Core aspects include: • Resistance to change. • Justification of inequality (e.g., social hierarchies). 2. Motivational and Cognitive Factors in Conservatism The study identifies several psychological motivations associated with conservatism, which explain why individuals may gravitate toward this [[Ideology]]: • Need for Cognitive Closure: Conservatives are more likely to prefer certainty, order, and structured [[Thinking]]. They tend to dislike [[Ambiguity]] or situations that require prolonged deliberation. • Intolerance of Ambiguity: A lower tolerance for uncertainty leads to a preference for clear rules, defined hierarchies, and tradition, which provide psychological [[Comfort]] and predictability. • Perception of Threat and Fear: Conservatives often exhibit a heightened sensitivity to perceived threats (e.g., physical or social instability). This contributes to preferences for policies and norms that ensure security, such as strong law enforcement, military spending, and stricter immigration policies. • Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO): The authors associate conservatism with a tendency to respect authority figures and maintain [[hierarchical]] social structures. SDO explains the justification of inequality, such as favouring systems that preserve social stratification. 3. Cognitive Style Differences • Conservatives tend to favour low openness to new experiences, valuing order and stability over novelty or complexity. • Liberals, by contrast, exhibit higher openness to experience, showing more curiosity, [[Creativity]], and willingness to explore unfamiliar ideas or solutions. 4. Resistance to Change Conservatism’s resistance to [[Change]] is tied to the psychological need to maintain familiarity and reduce uncertainty. This manifests in political opposition to reforms or innovations perceived as risky, such as policies involving social or cultural progressivism. 5. The Role of Ideology in Justifying the Status Quo Conservatism often functions as a system-justifying ideology, which rationalises and legitimises existing social, economic, and political structures. For example, individuals may adopt conservative beliefs to defend traditional institutions and hierarchies as inherently valuable or necessary. ##### Meta-Analysis Results The paper is based on a review of 88 studies across different disciplines ([[Psychology]], political science, [[Sociology]]) conducted over 50 years. The meta-analysis revealed consistent patterns linking conservatism to cognitive and motivational traits. ##### Criticisms and Nuances While the study is influential, it has received critiques for: • Overemphasising threat perception as a driver of conservatism. Some argue that not all conservative beliefs are fear-based; for example, cultural conservatism may stem from aesthetic or moral preferences. • Lacking sufficient focus on the liberal cognitive style, making it difficult to compare both ideologies equally. Additionally, the study acknowledges that its findings are probabilistic rather than deterministic: not every conservative individual exhibits all the identified traits, and context plays a significant role in shaping political beliefs. ##### Implications The study suggests that political ideologies are not purely rational choices but are often shaped by deep-seated psychological needs. This perspective has had a significant impact on how political psychology understands ideological differences, influencing subsequent research into polarisation, persuasion, and how political messaging appeals to different audiences. If you’re interested, I can delve deeper into specific aspects, such as the connection between threat perception and conservative preferences or how these findings compare to liberal psychology. ## Needs most commonly associated with conservatism Nonviolent Communication (NVC), developed by [[Marshall B. Rosenberg]], focuses on identifying universal human needs that motivate behaviour. When exploring needs most commonly associated with conservatism through the lens of NVC, these would align with values and motivations linked to stability, tradition, and security. Here are the key needs: 1. Security and Safety • Definition in NVC: The need for physical safety, predictability, and protection from harm. • Connection to Conservatism: Conservatives often prioritise policies and values that provide stability and mitigate perceived threats (e.g., strong law enforcement, national defence, border security). This stems from a desire to ensure personal and societal safety. 2. Order and Structure • Definition in NVC: The need for organisation, clarity, and reliable systems. • Connection to Conservatism: A preference for traditional hierarchies and established institutions can reflect the need for predictable and structured environments. This is especially evident in support for maintaining societal norms and institutions like the family or the rule of law. 3. Belonging and Community • Definition in NVC: The need to feel connected to a group or culture. • Connection to Conservatism: Conservatives often emphasise loyalty to family, nation, and cultural heritage. This reflects a desire to preserve shared traditions and group identity, fostering a sense of belonging and unity. 4. Consistency and Stability • Definition in NVC: The need for reliability and continuity over time. • Connection to Conservatism: A resistance to rapid change aligns with the need for stability. Conservatives often advocate for gradual reform, favouring continuity with the past to avoid disruption. 5. Autonomy and Self-Sufficiency • Definition in NVC: The need to make choices and take responsibility for one’s life. • Connection to Conservatism: Many conservative ideologies place a strong emphasis on individual responsibility and limited government intervention, reflecting a desire for autonomy in managing personal and community affairs. 6. Respect and Recognition • Definition in NVC: The need to be valued and seen for one’s contributions or identity. • Connection to Conservatism: This is evident in conservative emphasis on honouring traditions, respecting authority, and preserving cultural legacies. The focus on patriotism and national pride also ties to this need. 7. Identity and Meaning • Definition in NVC: The need for a sense of purpose, belonging to something greater, or defining oneself in relation to a group or tradition. • Connection to Conservatism: Conservatives often derive meaning from religious or cultural values and traditions, which provide a framework for understanding life’s purpose and connecting to history. ### Broader Reflections While these needs are often associated with conservatism, it’s important to note that they are universal and can also motivate progressive ideologies in different contexts. For instance, the need for community might inspire progressives to advocate for inclusivity, while for conservatives, it might focus on preserving existing cultural bonds. NVC’s emphasis on needs as universal could also serve as a bridge between ideological divides, helping people see that even when values or strategies differ, the underlying needs may overlap. ## Methods to build more inclusive and lasting communal connections Critics of traditional conservative approaches to fostering belonging and community often argue that relying on hierarchy, exclusivity, and traditional norms to build group identity can be counterproductive in a modern, pluralistic society. Here are some key criticisms and suggestions for how conservatives might adapt their methods to build more inclusive and lasting communal connections: Criticisms of Traditional Conservative Approaches 1. Overreliance on Hierarchy • Criticism: Hierarchical structures often impose rigid roles and expectations that may alienate individuals who don’t fit into those roles (e.g., women, minorities, or younger generations). While hierarchy can provide stability, it can also suppress innovation, diversity, and equal participation, which are essential for vibrant communities. • Example: A family structure that rigidly enforces traditional gender roles may fail to accommodate modern family dynamics, such as dual-income households or single parents, leading to exclusion rather than connection. 2. Exclusivity and “In-Group” Bias • Criticism: Traditional conservative emphasis on national or cultural identity can sometimes prioritise exclusivity, where loyalty to the “in-group” (e.g., one’s nation, religion, or ethnicity) leads to the marginalisation of others. This approach risks fragmenting modern societies that are increasingly diverse and globalised. • Example: Policies or rhetoric focused on preserving a narrowly defined “heritage” may alienate immigrants or minority groups, undermining the broader sense of community. 3. Resistance to Change • Criticism: The conservative preference for preserving traditions can stifle adaptability and prevent communities from evolving to meet modern needs. In a rapidly changing world, an overly rigid focus on the past may hinder efforts to build connections that resonate with new generations. • Example: Clinging to outdated rituals or practices may make younger generations feel disconnected, as those traditions may no longer align with their values or experiences. 4. Focus on Authority and Uniformity • Criticism: A strong emphasis on respect for authority and uniformity can discourage open dialogue and the inclusion of dissenting voices, which are crucial for fostering genuine, dynamic relationships. • Example: A top-down approach to community building (e.g., dictating values or practices without input) can alienate individuals who feel excluded from decision-making. Suggestions for Building New and Lasting Connections To foster belonging and community in the modern world, conservatives might consider adopting approaches that are more inclusive, adaptive, and participatory while still honouring their values of stability and shared identity. 1. Promote Voluntary and Egalitarian Participation • Suggestion: Move away from enforcing belonging through hierarchy or obligation and instead create opportunities for voluntary, meaningful engagement. For example, community service initiatives, mentorship programmes, or local projects can foster connection without relying on rigid structures. • Outcome: Encourages a sense of ownership and empowerment while maintaining communal values. 2. Celebrate Shared Values, Not Exclusivity • Suggestion: Focus on universal values such as kindness, mutual respect, and care for the community, rather than narrowly defining identity based on cultural or national heritage. This makes it easier to include diverse groups while maintaining a sense of unity. • Outcome: Builds bridges between different social, cultural, and religious groups while honouring common ground. 3. Foster Intergenerational Dialogue • Suggestion: Create spaces where older and younger generations can share perspectives, learn from each other, and adapt traditions to modern contexts. For example, adapting traditional ceremonies or holidays to include contemporary elements that resonate with younger people. • Outcome: Preserves traditions while making them relevant to future generations. 4. Embrace Decentralised Leadership • Suggestion: Shift from hierarchical authority to collaborative leadership, where communities co-create initiatives. For instance, instead of imposing top-down policies, involve diverse voices in shaping cultural or local projects. • Outcome: Encourages inclusivity and ensures that all members feel valued. 5. Adapt Traditions to Reflect Modern Realities • Suggestion: Allow traditions to evolve by incorporating the experiences and values of diverse community members. For example, traditional family structures can adapt to celebrate non-traditional families or gender roles. • Outcome: Creates a sense of belonging that reflects the diversity of modern life. 6. Focus on Localism and Grassroots Initiatives • Suggestion: Instead of emphasising national or large-scale identities, invest in strengthening local communities. Small, local initiatives allow for personal connections and more meaningful interaction. • Example: Building strong local networks through community events, farmers’ markets, or neighbourhood improvement projects. • Outcome: Strengthens bonds through shared, tangible experiences. 7. Leverage Technology for Connection • Suggestion: Use digital platforms to bring people together across geographical or social divides. Virtual communities or forums can provide modern spaces for people to engage with shared values. • Outcome: Expands the reach of traditional community-building methods while remaining accessible and relevant. 8. Prioritise Empathy and Dialogue • Suggestion: Shift the focus from enforcing unity to fostering understanding. Host forums, discussions, or events where people can share their perspectives and find common ground. • Outcome: Encourages authentic relationships and reduces division by valuing diversity within unity. Conclusion To adapt to modern challenges, conservatives can benefit from rethinking traditional methods of fostering belonging and group identity. By embracing inclusive, participatory, and evolving approaches, they can preserve the value of community while making it accessible and relevant in today’s diverse and dynamic world. In doing so, they may also strengthen their message by appealing to a broader base of people who seek both connection and flexibility. `Concepts:` `Knowledge Base:`