We've found the cause of conservatism, but is there a cure?

[Oscar]

Dear Ryan: We've found the cause of conservatism, but is there a cure?

[ http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/letters ... there-cure ]

By Linda Leon | December 2, 2014


Ryan Leef, Member of Parliament for Yukon

Dear Ryan,

On November 17, CBC's, The Current, had a feature on Keystone XL pipeline and its potential effect on Canada's ability to achieve its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions targets. Anna Maria Tremonti mediated a debate between Keith Stewart from Greenpeace and Ron Liepert, a senior advisor for the Canadian Strategy Group and the nominated federal Conservative Party candidate for Calgary Signal Hill.

In a 22 minute episode, Mr. Liepert referred to people concerned about climate change as "extremist" twice, "extreme environmentalists" twice and just plain "extreme" once. Ms. Tremonti pointed out that this was exactly the sort of language used to describe ISIS. Mr. Liepert was unrepentant and continued to slander environmentalists.

Mr. Liepert is used to addressing conservatives. And now there is an explanation for why slanderous fear mongering is so persuasive with this group.

A 2011 study done by University College of London on the brains of students revealed something very interesting. [ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... gdala.html ] The amygdala in self-identifying conservatives was larger than normal. The amygdala, often referred to as the reptile brain, is responsible for emotions such as fear and rage. The conservative subjects did not have larger brains than their non-conservative counter-parts. Rather the conservative brains had a corresponding reduction in the size of the anterior cingulate cortex, which is the part of the brain associated with empathy, curiosity and cognitive functions.

Now, The Current's audience tend to be well-informed, reasoning people. And Ron Liepert is not a stupid person. So, why was he using this kind of language when he knows well that most CBC listeners would not be persuaded by slander? Was it a veiled threat to those listeners who might speak out in favour of action on climate change?

MORE:

[ http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/letters ... there-cure ]

- - - - - -

(2010) Tory voters found to have larger 'primitive' lobe in brain

[ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... gdala.html ]

By Daily Mail Reporter Updated: 03:17 GMT, 29 December 2010

- - - -

QUOTE: "'I think we should have him scanned,' he said."

- - - -

Our political allegiances could be hard-wired into our brains, neuroscientists believe.

Researchers have found evidence that the brains of conservatives are a different shape to those of Left-wingers.

Scans of 90 students’ brains at University College London uncovered a ‘strong correlation’ between the thickness of two particular areas of grey matter and an individual’s political views.

Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amygdala - a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion.

It is an almond-shape set of neurons located deep in the brain's medial temporal lobe.

However, those aligned to the left had thicker anterior cingulates - which is an area associated with anticipation and decision-making.

The research was carried out by Geraint Rees director of the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience who said he was 'very surprised' by the finding, which is being peer reviewed before publication next year.

It was commissioned as a light-hearted experiment by actor Colin Firth as part of his turn guest editing BBC Radio 4's Today programme but has now developed into a serious effort to discover whether we are programmed with a particular political view.

- - - -SNIP - - -

Mr Firth - who recently declared he had ended public support for the Liberal Democrats - said he would like to have party leader and now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg subjected to the tests.

'I think we should have him scanned,' he said.

He said the coalition made him 'extremely uneasy' but would not rule out voting Lib Dem in future.

'I would have to see what identity they took on because I don't recognise them at the moment. I think all three parties are in a state of re-evaluation.'

Talking about the experiment, he said: 'I took this on as a fairly frivolous exercise: I just decided to find out what was biologically wrong with people who don't agree with me and see what scientists had to say about it and they actually came up with something.'