why do most poor people in the US vote for Democrats according to spiral dynamics?

[Hardkill]

So, I've already watched a number of Leo's vids on society, politics, spiral dynamics, and consciousness and what I've learned is that people in low-income countries actually rather have conservative leaders authoritarian rule their country in an authoritarian manner than have liberal leaders govern their country in a more democratic manner. Leo has said that the reason for this is because individuals under great stress have a strong urge for rigidity, predictable rules, conformity, and order in order to survive. So, if that's the case, then why do most why do most poor people in the US vote for liberal and Democratic politicians when those voters are struggling to survive themselves?

Edited November 20, 2021 by Hardkill

[Heinrich Faust]

Until stage green, it's very much about personal benefits.
So, privileged (rich, male, white, straight, Protestant) people tend to vote conservative.
Underprivileged (poor, female, black, gay, Non-Christian) people tend to vote progressive.

Some stats:
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/06/02/in-changing-u-s-electorate-race-and-education-remain-stark-dividing-lines/
 https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/26/what-the-2020-electorate-looks-like-by-party-race-and-ethnicity-age-education-and-religion/

[Heinrich Faust]

Fun fact: One and the same stage blue/orange person is even likely to vote for opposite parties in different situations. Immigrants are a good example of this. Here's a study on the voting behaviour of Turks in the Netherlands, with suffrage in both countries:

Quote

When we compare party choice in the Dutch and Turkish elections, it appears that most Erdoğan supporters voted for the Labor Party (PvdA) in the Dutch national elections in the period under study. They supported a conservative candidate in Turkey and a progressive social-democratic party in the Netherlands.

https://academic.oup.com/migration/advance-article/doi/10.1093/migration/mnz034/5543475#185814667

[Carl-Richard]

You said it yourself: it applies to low-income countries. USA is not Somalia.

[Jacob Morres]

my guess is it might have to do something with democrats fighting for policies that support them more often. democrats usually advocate for more social programs and lesser priveleged people are in need of it more 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Jacob Morres

[Hardkill]

11 hours ago, Heinrich Faust said:

Fun fact: One and the same stage blue/orange person is even likely to vote for opposite parties in different situations. Immigrants are a good example of this. Here's a study on the voting behaviour of Turks in the Netherlands, with suffrage in both countries:

https://academic.oup.com/migration/advance-article/doi/10.1093/migration/mnz034/5543475#185814667

That is interesting. I didn't know about that regarding Turks in the Netherlands. I did read those articles, but it didn't help me clarify as to why this happens in different situations or different countries.

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

You said it yourself: it applies to low-income countries. USA is not Somalia.

Yeah, but why does it apply to only poor people low-income countries and not to poor people in USA?

1 hour ago, Jacob Morres said:

my guess is it might have to do something with democrats fighting for policies that support them more often. democrats usually advocate for more social programs and lesser priveleged people are in need of it more 

Right, well that's what I always thought before watching Leo's vids pertaining to this matter. However, if that's the reason then why don't poor people in low-income countries also want leaders who fight for more social programs, equal rights, democracy all of which underprivileged people are in need of?  

Edited November 22, 2021 by Hardkill

[Yarco]

Democrats are perceived by poor people to offer them more government programs, subsidies, etc.

Interestingly though, there's a pretty big chunk of white poor people in America who will vote Conservative even if it isn't in their best interest. The logic is that they want those conservative systems in place for if/when they do finally "make it" in society.

[Carl-Richard]

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Yeah, but why does it apply to only poor people low-income countries and not to poor people in USA?

Because a country with Red instability is different from a country with Orange instability. Somalia needs Blue (conservatives) while USA needs Green (progressives).

[Hardkill]

10 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Because a country with Red instability is different from a country with Orange instability. Somalia needs Blue (conservatives) while USA needs Green (progressives).

Ah okay. I think I am starting to understand now. So, it's because poor people in lower-income countries are much more primitive individuals and live in much more primitive environments than poor people in higher income countries. Is that correct?

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

Ah okay. I think I am starting to understand now. So, it's because poor people in lower-income countries are much more primitive individuals and live in much more primitive environments than poor people in higher income countries. Is that correct?

"Primitive" is a bit harsh, but yeah. Poor people in USA are experiencing the downsides of capitalism, and the democrats at least pretend to care about that. Poor people in Somalia are experiencing the downsides of chaotic tyranny, and that's where conservative values like order and purpose (religion, law and morality) come in.

[AdroseAkise]

@Hardkill Ken Wilber answers your very question:

ers

[Hardkill]

21 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

"Primitive" is a bit harsh, but yeah. Poor people in USA are experiencing the downsides of capitalism, and the democrats at least pretend to care about that. Poor people in Somalia are experiencing the downsides of chaotic tyranny, and that's where conservative values like order and purpose (religion, law and morality) come in.

Ah okay. Also, would you say that poor people in lower-income societies are actually poorer, less educated, and more traditional/religious than poor people in higher-income societies?

[Carl-Richard]

22 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Ah okay. Also, would you say that poor people in lower-income societies are actually poorer, less educated, and more traditional/religious than poor people in higher-income societies?

Certainly poorer and less educated on average. "Traditional/religious", it depends. Religion at Purple/Red is more earthy and embodied than Blue religion which is more abstract and behaviorally restrictive. It's an interesting dynamic, because the poorest are usually the least developed, which means that in Somalia, the poorest are Purple/Red, but they are attracted to the societal benefits of Blue. In USA, the poorest are Blue/Orange, but they want the benefits of Green. You therefore don't have to actually embody a stage yourself to be open to its benefits as long as you live on the extremes and experience the worst downsides of the status quo.

[Heinrich Faust]

On 22.11.2021 at 6:40 AM, Yarco said:

Interestingly though, there's a pretty big chunk of white poor people in America who will vote Conservative even if it isn't in their best interest. The logic is that they want those conservative systems in place for if/when they do finally "make it" in society.

I think, that's only true for a small minority. Don't reduce the parties to their economic agendas. If you're a poor, white, stage blue, Christian patriot, you have all reasons to vote Republican except for their economic agenda. While if you're a poor, ethnic, stage blue Muslim, you have no reason to vote Republican, because it's not "your" stage blue.

[Heinrich Faust]

On 22.11.2021 at 6:29 AM, Hardkill said:

I did read those articles, but it didn't help me clarify as to why this happens in different situations or different countries.

Sorry, I didn't read your text carefully. I rather answered the question: "Why do stage blue/orange Americans vote for the Dems (orange/green) rather than for the Reps (blue/orange)?"

[DocWatts]

Here in the US, the Republican Party has been drifting towards becoming a white nationalist party over the last half century.

You have to understand that self interest doesn't only mean everyone economic policy, it's also about validating one's identity.

For many poor white people who voted Republican, validation of thier resentments towards an increasingly diverse society that they feel is leaving them behind is a stronger motivator than economic concerns that will actually impact thier lives in tangible ways.

For young people, the LGBT community, and communities of color a much more diverse and inclusive Democratic Party is also validating. But on top of that, since this side of the political divide is at a higher developmental stage than those who vote Republican, they're more successfully able to understand the connection between politics and  material conditions that impact thier own lives.

[ted73104]

Sadly in the end, it doesn't really matter which party is trying to help the poor. Not sure if anyone linked this video before, but ultimately it is up to the people to support and help folks who are in need.

 

[benjamindavidsteele]

People tend to vote conservative when they are dealing with stress, fear, anxiety, threat, etc. For example, research has shown that rates of social conservatism and authoritarianism increase with higher parasite load. Also, consider that, compared to liberals, conservatives on average have a larger amygdala (mammalian brain involved in emotional regulation) but smaller neocortex, prefrontal cortex, and anterior cingulate (involved in executive control, critical thinking, unique problem solving, pattern recognition, cognitive empathy, etc). As expected, stressful conditions such as poverty tend to increase the amygdala at the expense of these other brain structures.

But what makes the US poor different in the US is that they are less poor and living under less desperate conditions. Many years of polling show that most Americans are fairly far left-liberal. For all the problems of the US, we have resolved or lessened many of the worst public health issues (infectious diseases, dirty water, heavy metal toxicity, malnutrition, etc). Relative to poorer countries, even American social conservatives are far less socially conservative. Think about how American conservatives will sometimes claim to be classical liberals but almost no American will identify as a classical conservative. Basically, we Americans are all different varieties of liberals at this point.

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, benjamindavidsteele said:

People tend to vote conservative when they are dealing with stress, fear, anxiety, threat, etc. For example, research has shown that rates of social conservatism and authoritarianism increase with higher parasite load. Also, consider that, compared to liberals, conservatives on average have a larger amygdala (mammalian brain involved in emotional regulation) but smaller neocortex, prefrontal cortex, and anterior cingulate (involved in executive control, critical thinking, unique problem solving, pattern recognition, cognitive empathy, etc). As expected, stressful conditions such as poverty tend to increase the amygdala at the expense of these other brain structures.

But what makes the US poor different in the US is that they are less poor and living under less desperate conditions. Many years of polling show that most Americans are fairly far left-liberal. For all the problems of the US, we have resolved or lessened many of the worst public health issues (infectious diseases, dirty water, heavy metal toxicity, malnutrition, etc). Relative to poorer countries, even American social conservatives are far less socially conservative. Think about how American conservatives will sometimes claim to be classical liberals but almost no American will identify as a classical conservative. Basically, we Americans are all different varieties of liberals at this point.

I don't know why I'm laughing so bad while reading this. 

 

[DieFree]

USA is a rich, liberal and democratic country so the life conditions here are not the same as other places and spiral has more nuances here. Green is very strong in many parts of the USA and controls significant parts of the media, giving it great cultural power and the ability to hold sway over significant portions of blue. I remember when Obama was first running the green media made him appear to be the second-coming of Christ and the Green grassroots mobilized a huge, cross-spiral winning coalition. My stage-blue Muslim mother (Somalia origin, U.S citizen) voted for him on the night of his election because a stage green Afro-American man showed up at her house and drove her to the polling station (someone spent incredible resources identifying houses of potential voters, coordinating car pools etc) and she had been hearing wall-to-wall positive coverage about him in the Green media, which even impacts immigrant-language programs. (She refused to vote for him the second time around because he was "bombing the Muslims like Bush" - showing the power of stage blue thinking). 

Societies like India don't have the money, and overwhelming media and grassroots power of stage green in places like the U.S to override the tendency of stage blue "us vs them"/authoritarianism. But even when some elections result in this override, stage blue tendencies are still simmering under the surface (see Obama-Trump voters).