What explains the liberal-conservative happiness gap?

https://www.natesilver.net/p/what-explains-the-liberal-conservative

by ivewonyoung • 1 year ago

24 43 1 year ago

natesilver.net

k3102• 1 year ago

One word: "self-reported"

Ask me about my incredible biceps, triceps, abs and buns of steel. :-)

And that I.Q. ...

bfung• 1 year ago

Ignorance is bliss, right? :)

tony_landis• 1 year ago

Perhaps what they really measured was honesty.

cortesoft• 1 year ago

This is kind of my gut instinct, too, but I don't think it is intentional lying.

The question asked the respondent to evaluate their "mental health". This is oversimplifying, but the conservative view is often that worrying about mental health makes you 'soft', and that people complaining about their mental health are whiners who need to toughen up.

If this view is accurate, it would make sense that conservatives would not state that they have poor mental health, because they believe they should just toughen up and deal with it.

Now, whether this means that conservatives are actually more happy or not is not clear, but an alternative explanation would be that conservatives are in denial about their mental health issues, and will describe themselves as not having any, and instead cope in unhealthy ways (drinking, getting angry at minorities and immigrants, abusing their spouses/kids, etc)

Of course, the alternative alternative explanation is that conservatives are right, and liberals are just whiny naval-gazers who will complain about everything even though their lives are objectively better than previous generations.

barbazoo• 1 year ago

even though their lives are objectively better than previous generations

Which also might not even be true either anymore.

Americans are less likely to earn more than their parents

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2020/09/social-mobility-upwa...

Llamamoe2• 1 year ago

Anecdotally, there's a lot more people who "don't have mental health issues" and instead act them out on others through verbal or physical abuse on the right side. I know more people with abusive parents than otherwise, and most of them were right-leaning.

9rx9• 1 year ago

And the most likely explanation is that the liberal-conservative divide has nothing to do with it. Rather, we find correlation simply because conservatives are more likely to live in rural areas, which is where we find happier people according to other studies.

k3102• 1 year ago

I don't know how old folks are here, but when I was young, ANY mental problem had a real stigma associated with it. I imagine there was a lot of denial. And there's a whole lot of denial going on these days, even with our higher awareness, and a lot of machismo, much of which is projection. "I'm fine. The other {person, group} is not right"

Projection is pretty rampant.

michaelteter• 1 year ago

Could it be that one group is more likely to be worried about issues like climate change and human rights, while the other group seems gleefully unconcerned?

morkalork• 1 year ago

Almost like reporting on the antelope-crocodile anxiety gap

archagon• 1 year ago

More like the frog-scorpion anxiety gap.

hermannj314• 1 year ago

A more charitable take might be that conservatives tend to be community focused, active with their school boards and asking their State lawmakers to address issues, whereas liberal politics focus on nearly all issues being Federal issues for some reason.

The locus of control imbalance causes a tremendous amount of suffering.

derbOac• 1 year ago

That makes a lot of assumptions about the state.

SpecialistK• 1 year ago

This possibility is addressed in the article:

There are ways to frame these findings sympathetically to liberals: for instance, that liberals are more conscientious about the suffering of other people or the conditions of the world, whereas conservatives are happy but selfish.

crmd• 1 year ago

Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine famously summarized the US left-wing position well with, “If you’re not angry you’re not paying attention.”

wkat42423• 1 year ago

If I were in the US I would also be pissed as a leftist. I'd sure have enough reason to, especially now.

revx2• 1 year ago

I think belonging is one of the most important contributors to mental health, and anecdotally, fewer liberals and leftists "belong" to a group.

There are progressive churches out there, for example, but they see much smaller membership overall than other denominations. Evangelical conservative megachurches are designed to foster a sense of belonging and community for those who can believe their teachings. Progressive churches celebrate the questioning mind and search for meaning, which actively does not create a culture of conformity, and hence raises the barrier to allow people to feel like they belong.

We know that hazing rituals, shared uniforms and appearance, and groupthink create strong bonds, but also lead to little-t and capial-T traumas, especially for queer or neurodivergent folks who may never truly "fit in" without heavy masking or closeting. Leftists also have a problem with gatekeeping, contrast this with evangelicals who design easy paths in to their churches for folks who "haven't done the required reading"

Additionally, the active suppression of liberal/leftist and queer groups (e.g. McCarthyism), the AIDS crisis, leftist infighting, and leftist distrust of authority mean a lot of young progressives are starting from scratch or facing large headwinds in finding any sort of social group. The Internet is helping combat this, but the lack of elders, advisors, and established routes to leadership mean that there aren't many organizations to even join, and the ones that do exist are often run poorly.

Contrast this with conservative groups which have generations of experience, leadership routes, training, etc. Individual evangelical colleges matriculate thousands of students while progressive religious programs are lucky to number in the 30-50 range.

Source: anecdotes and personal experience, as someone with leadership experience in a progressive religion :)

wkat42423• 1 year ago

I think belonging is one of the most important contributors to mental health, and anecdotally, fewer liberals and leftists "belong" to a group.
There are progressive churches out there, for example, but they see much smaller membership overall than other denominations.

You don't need a church to have something to belong to. I'm not going to believe in gods just so I can sing kumbaya with others. The whole point of belonging is that you can be yourself and be accepted as you are. That's key. If you're going to pretend you're just fooling yourself.

Also, churches tell you how to feel, what to do, what to think. Another thing that doesn't go down very well with most progressives. I don't think that this causes an extra barrier to belong though. The key part is finding a group that suits you.

Or do you mean these 'churches' are more like enlightenment classes of self discovery? In that case I wouldn't call it a church due to all the negative associations that brings.

We know that hazing rituals, shared uniforms and appearance, and groupthink create strong bonds, but also lead to little-t and capial-T traumas, especially for queer or neurodivergent folks who may never truly "fit in" without heavy masking or closeting

As a neurodivergent kinda queer leftist, I absolutely hate hazing rituals and uniforms and authority. But it's not like I'm desperately trying to find a group to belong to. A group I belong to has to fit me, not the other way around. They're easier to find than you think. Just chat to someone wearing a rainbow band and they'll tell you what's good in the area. Or someone with blue hair or extravagant clothing. Our communities aren't strictly organised and regulated or formalized but that doesn't mean that they don't exist.

In fact that's something that conservatives tend to project on us. They think there's an LGBT or 'woke' 'agenda'. They project their own need for leadership and organisation on us. In reality this isn't the case at all. Everyone makes up their own goals. And that's great. Progressiveness is all about embracing different.

For me I have found such places such as makerspaces and more spicy places, all of which ended up being full of neurodivergents like me :) And definitely all progressive. But they share no elements of churches other than being a community.

I do think neurodivergents are often less happy because we have more difficulty in life where most others are neurotypical.

there aren't many organizations to even join, and the ones that do exist are often run poorly.

Most makerspaces are really badly run :) But it doesn't matter. It's not about being successful. It's about making cool stuff with others.

revx2• 1 year ago

I appreciate the response! I really enjoy talking about this stuff so please take my long response as just me thinking out loud.

I forgot to mention that I'm an atheist. I call myself "religious but not spiritual". I was super reluctant to go to anything called "church" until my partner dragged me along 10 or so years ago, and the religion I belong to now has no particular theological creed. Reclaiming religious language (like "church") and disassociating it from the baggage of conservative organized religion is something very interesting to me. It's like the word "god", which can mean a big white dude in the sky, or it can just mean the way the universe works. (Aka monotheism and panentheism).

A group I belong to has to fit me, not the other way around

I think this is one of the major sticking points a lot of progressives have that lead to shallow relationships. Deep community often takes work, change, and sacrifice. I don't mean changing who you are - just how you interact with others, how you open up, and how/what you are willing to give.

Without buy-in (monetary, skills, helping others, etc.), it's not really a community. It's just a social interest group, and that's not going to provide the kind of psychological safety and deep connection that contributes to well being.

I'm not saying you have to go to church, or that a makerspace or spicy setting can't be a community. And I do think a lot of them can foster relationships that turn into real community. But in my (biased) experience, there are few multigenerational progressive spaces designed to encourage kids, elders, adults, etc. to connect meaningfully. Contributing further to the lack of structure, wisdom, and leadership that can allow an organization to do big work.

I too hate hazing rituals and uniforms and authority, although I'm starting to soften on that last one (authority), as I find progressive spaces that vet and hold accountable their leadership. Without a web of trust and accountability we are all just off on our own, pulling in many different directions at the same time, while conservatives have figured out how to get everyone working on the same few problems, regardless of minor differences.

I'm obviously exaggerating and using metaphor, but what else makes a good story :)

nailer• 1 year ago

Likely stronger connections to the family, and both sexes generally report greater happiness in traditional gender roles.

owenversteeg• 1 year ago

It's pretty easy for this sort of thing to devolve into political argument, so I'm going to try to approach it from a neutral standpoint that both political groups would agree with: broad generalization, but liberals are living in the "future" while conservatives are living in the "past." One thing that both sides generally agree on is that our current social ills are a modern phenomenon. Liberals and conservatives alike will tell you that it's important to live near the outdoors, near family [1], have a tight social network and groups you belong to. Meanwhile, conservatives are significantly more likely to have of those things.

Does that explain everything? No, not by a long shot. But I think it has a significant effect.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/section-3-po...

Defletter6• 1 year ago

I think the issue ultimately comes down to what Ian Danskin described, paraphrased: that liberals see the faults in society as things that can be fixed, whereas conservatives see those faults as facts of life (reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yts2F44RqFw). Wouldn't you also be less happy if you viewed society's faults as fixable, where you rally, vote, and protest for them to be fixed, and yet they almost never are?

9rx9• 1 year ago

where you rally, vote, and protest for them to be fixed, and yet they almost never are?

I find it very interesting that you indicate that the liberal approach to fixing a problem is not to fix it, but to plead to other people to fix it for them. How far do you see that extrapolating? It is certainly the case that the data suggests that liberals are more likely to outsource work to other people even for simple daily tasks like food preparation, and in popular culture the "liberal-educated elite" are surely portrayed as seeing many jobs as being beneath them.

Which, perhaps, leads us into the topic of elite overproduction. There is a strong case to be made that the US suffers from it, and what you describe very well could be a manifestation of it. Everyone wants to be the boss, but nobody wants to do the manual labor. When one is certain they should be the manager, so to speak, but fails to achieve that position, I can see how that would turn one towards unhappiness. It can be a bit demoralizing to realize that you aren't as great/able/etc. as you thought you were.

Defletter6• 1 year ago

While there are certainly nuggets of truth in what you say, your "the liberal approach to fixing a problem is not to fix it, but to plead to other people to fix it for them" is nonetheless an exceptionally uncharitable way to re-frame people trying to get their government to enact change. It reminds me of that infamous Pride and Prejudice review: "Just a bunch of people going to each other's houses."

There are a multitude of issues that can only be solved systemically, like abortion rights, or the housing crisis, or homelessness, or wage theft, or "delay, deny, defend", school shootings and other rampant forms of gun violence, etc. Like, believe it or not, but there are many issues that are not fixable by just fixing it like it's a squeaky door hinge or a neighbour's overgrown lawn. And even with issues like homelessness, if you wanted to do your bit by providing food, you can get arrested and fined for that, depending on the jurisdiction.

Like, yes, liberals tend to have certain amount of defeatism where they wont attempt to help anyone if they can't help everyone. And yes, there are issues with "liberal" intellectualism, particularly within the middle class. But some of the charges you make are misattributed: there is literally a meme ("Who Wants Change? Who Wants To Change?") which my game-dev community has a version of ("Who wants to make a game? Who wants to code that game?"). You could make a similar one about story-ideas and actual authors. This is in no way something exclusive to liberals or even predominant to liberals. It's just kind of human nature. But I feel like this accusation, for many, comes from a Fox-and-the-Grapes style resentment towards the middle class, which tends to lean more liberal. And like... this is just bog-standard class warfare, not actual ideological difference.

znpy2• 1 year ago

I get that quote, but there's an aspect to that that has change over the last ~20 years or so and that is the key pivotal point.

liberals see the faults in society as things that can be fixed

The change in my opinion is that the faults in society is a perfect excuse for extreme rage and extreme anger.

Sometimes talking to some left-wing extremists really sounds like talking to somebody that's been brainwashed.

Llamamoe2• 1 year ago

I think the simplest explanation would be simply that people align with ideology that serves them best, e.g. people who are less fortunate(in terms of health, life circumstances, etc) tend to align with left-wing equity and welfare messages, whereas it's no big secret that the right wing generally seeks just to preserve status quo, discrimination and inequality included, and that's much more likely to attract people who are happy with their lot in life.

Furthermore, the very act of caring about state- and world- level issues, of believing that climate change, sexism, racism, and other discriminations are rampant and big issues - is stressful. This would additionally explain why women are most affected - because misogyny directly affects them as a group.

As someone else pointed, the "self-reported" part is important too. Liberals are much more likely to talk about and admit to mental health struggles, while conservatives are more likely to tough it out and save face - because, somehow, even mental health has become politicised in the US.

9rx9• 1 year ago

people who are less fortunate(in terms of health, life circumstances, etc) tend to align with left-wing

Typically that is the case in large cities, but the opposite is generally true elsewhere. The least fortunate communities in the US are by and large hardcore right-leaning.

But perhaps you accidentally stumbled upon the real significant factor? We do, after all, know that rural/small town dwellers are happier than large urban dwellers: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/17/peopl... Their philosophical leanings may have nothing to do with it; just mere correlation.

znpy2• 1 year ago

Typically that is the case in large cities, but the opposite is generally true elsewhere. The least fortunate communities in the US are by and large hardcore right-leaning.

As somebody that moved from a small community to a large city, the point that's missing here is that being "poor" in the big city is much much different from being poor in the small community.

Except from complete homeless people, people living in the big city and considering themselves poor are usually way richer (in terms of yearly earnings) than the average small community dwellers.

It's largely a matter of perception.

That's been my experience.

directevolve• 1 year ago

Conservatives don’t seem happier than liberals.

I’m quite confident the conservatives I know are fairly unhappy and unstable people, so is there a population of well-adjusted conservatives I never meet, or is this self-report bias?

I’m waiting until I get some concrete examples of what this happiness gap looks like in practice before I take these results too seriously.

slater• 1 year ago

I bet the answer rhymes with "honey".

What explains the liberal-conservative happiness gap?

Related Stories