# Humanities & Anthropology > History & Civilisations >  Swedish Egalitarianism is a relatively new phenomenon?

## Angela

There's always been a lot of talk to the effect that Swedish egalitarianism is perhaps a product of longstanding cultural development.

If this study is correct, that's not the case.

See:
https://academic.oup.com/past/advanc...gtz010/5498958

"*Abstract*During the twentieth century, Sweden became known as a country with an unusually egalitarian distribution of income and wealth, an encompassing welfare state, and an exceptionally strong social democracy. It is commonplace among historians and social scientists to consider these equal outcomes of the twentieth century as the logical end result of a much longer historical trajectory of egalitarianism, from early modern free peasant farmers or from a peculiar Swedish political culture that was egalitarian and consensus-oriented. This article questions the Swedish interpretation of _Sonderweg_. In 1900, Sweden had some of the most unequal voting laws in western Europe, and more severe economic inequality than the United States. This throws the purported continuity from early modern equality to social democratic equality into question. The roots of twentieth-century Swedish egalitarianism lie in exceptionally well-organized popular movements after 1870, with a strong egalitarian counter-hegemonic culture and unusually broad popular participation in politics."

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

I've always thought that Swedes look feminine, and so they act that way: submissive. It sounds too simple to be true, but the more I think about it it does seem to be the case that we can tell a lot about people from their faces. AI can exploit this too, so it's definitely a measurable phenomenon. In nations with low sexual dimorphism, lighter pigmentation etc. political correctness has taken root more strongly. Italians on the whole, in comparison as a good Western European example, are too tribalistic and masculine to be blinded by cognitive dissonances like political correctness. They have a mental boldness about them. And God forbid anybody mentions the Caucasus, they're like Italians but to such an extreme that it turns from charming to scary (though the mafia is hardly charming I suppose).

----------


## hrvclv

> I've always thought that Swedes look feminine, and so they act that way: submissive. It sounds too simple to be true, but the more I think about it it does seem to be the case that we can tell a lot about people from their faces. AI can exploit this too, so it's definitely a measurable phenomenon. In nations with low sexual dimorphism, lighter pigmentation etc. political correctness has taken root more strongly. Italians on the whole, in comparison as a good Western European example, are too tribalistic and masculine to be blinded by cognitive dissonances like political correctness. They have a mental boldness about them. And God forbid anybody mentions the Caucasus, they're like Italians but to such an extreme that it turns from charming to scary (though the mafia is hardly charming I suppose).


I doubt the place of women in any given society says anything about how virile its men are. The ancient Celts had women warriors. The Scythians also had their own Amazons. I doubt the men in those cultures were effeminate sissies.

----------


## berun

@ToBeOrNotToBe, I think that Swedes have not changed so much phenotypicaly since the Viking age, when they were perfoming very "macho" actions like raping, burning churches, robbing, killing with no cause, taking slaves, and so on.

----------


## Angela

Maybe all their anti-social types died in foreign lands. Half joking. :)

Nice people, the Swedes, from the few I've met.

----------


## halfalp

I always believe any country social system is tied to the government in place, and especially to the extent of what this government accept and dont accept. Sweden is known for having a very feminist government, and the equality shown in media is not relative to sweden, but relative to the swede governement pressure towards it. America is a very good country to analyze those kind of systems, very conservative states have very different opinions on social subjects than very liberal states.

A political system of a country is not relative or equal to how the majority of the people of the said country are seeing things.

----------


## Angela

> I always believe any country social system is tied to the government in place, and especially to the extent of what this government accept and dont accept. Sweden is known for having a very feminist government, and the equality shown in media is not relative to sweden, but relative to the swede governement pressure towards it. America is a very good country to analyze those kind of systems, very conservative states have very different opinions on social subjects than very liberal states.
> 
> A political system of a country is not relative or equal to how the majority of the people of the said country are seeing things.


You've just proved the very opposite of what you set out to prove. Conservative states pass conservative laws; liberal states pass liberal laws. Conservative states send conservative representatives to the national legislature, and liberal districts send liberals. Usually that results, as it did this election cycle, in a liberal House of Representatives, because it is based on proportional representation by population. 

What keeps the U.S. from swinging too far to the left, or right for that matter is that the founders in their wisdom provided for two legislative bodies. The Senate is not based on population density. Each state gets two senators: tiny in size and population Rhode Island gets the same number as huge California. That way, every part of the country has some say: rural as well as urban, conservative areas as well as liberal areas. The tension between Senate and House keeps us from swinging too far in either direction.

Most countries don't have this, and so people get a government which they "directly" put in place. The laws are passed by their representatives. If you're in the minority, of course, and don't support the majority viewpoint, you're out of luck. That's democracy.

Btw, the Upper Midwest has a heavy concentration of Scandinavian Americans. Ever watch the movie Fargo? It's a good representation of accent, attitudes, etc.

----------


## Ygorcs

> I've always thought that Swedes look feminine, and so they act that way: submissive. It sounds too simple to be true, but the more I think about it it does seem to be the case that we can tell a lot about people from their faces. AI can exploit this too, so it's definitely a measurable phenomenon. In nations with low sexual dimorphism, lighter pigmentation etc. political correctness has taken root more strongly. Italians on the whole, in comparison as a good Western European example, are too tribalistic and masculine to be blinded by cognitive dissonances like political correctness. They have a mental boldness about them. And God forbid anybody mentions the Caucasus, they're like Italians but to such an extreme that it turns from charming to scary (though the mafia is hardly charming I suppose).


Right, that's why the Swedes were such charmingly submissive, harmless and pacifist creatures throughout the Middle Ages (unless you're implying some major genetic change happened in the last centuries there). Your hypothesis reminded me of Lombroso for a moment.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> Right, that's why the Swedes were such charmingly submissive, harmless and pacifist creatures throughout the Middle Ages (unless you're implying some major genetic change happened in the last centuries there). Your hypothesis reminded me of Lombroso for a moment.


Well, the correlation certainly exists today - light skin and low sexual dimorphism (i.e. a more feminine-looking population) clearly predicts susceptibility to political correctness amongst European nations. As for the whole Viking thing, the vast majority were Danes or Western Norwegians.

All I'll say regarding the question of causation is that AI is predicting a lot based on facial appearance (though this research is stunted due to political correctness!), so there's clearly something to it - plus, it's pretty obvious that you can tell a lot about a person based on their appearance, or the basics at least.

----------


## bicicleur

> Well, the correlation certainly exists today - light skin and low sexual dimorphism (i.e. a more feminine-looking population) clearly predicts susceptibility to political correctness amongst European nations. As for the whole Viking thing, the vast majority were Danes or Western Norwegians.
> 
> All I'll say regarding the question of causation is that AI is predicting a lot based on facial appearance (though this research is stunted due to political correctness!), so there's clearly something to it - plus, it's pretty obvious that you can tell a lot about a person based on their appearance, or the basics at least.


you simply associate masculinity with darker people
you are wrong and biassed

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> you simply associate masculinity with darker people
> you are wrong and biassed


Within Europe at least, it's definitely true.

----------


## Angela

If you look at what people choose for "masculinity" when presented with two very similar faces, it's almost never about pigmentation. It's how "rugged" the faces are: squarer, stronger jaw; stronger, more prominent nose, stronger forehead bone etc. The "softer" the facial features, the less "masculinity" people see.

Just saying. 

Is the "preference", if that's what you want, hard wired, or culture?

There are also subtleties to it.

I don't think anyone would deny Arnold Schwarzenegger has a masculine face, but I think and have always thought he's ugly. Too, too much.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> If you look at what people choose for "masculinity" when presented with two very similar faces, it's almost never about pigmentation. It's how "rugged" the faces are: squarer, stronger jaw; stronger, more prominent nose, stronger forehead bone etc. The "softer" the facial features, the less "masculinity" people see.
> 
> Just saying. 
> 
> Is the "preference", if that's what you want, hard wired, or culture?
> 
> There are also subtleties to it.
> 
> I don't think anyone would deny Arnold Schwarzenegger has a masculine face, but I think and have always thought he's ugly. Too, too much.


I mostly agree, but with special emphasis on the nose. I guess this is getting into the realm of phrenology and the like, but to me a prominent yet well-sculpted nose signifies social dominance. So an intrapigmentational example below to emphasise that it isn't just about how "gracile" you are:





And is it a coincidence that the toughest, most masculine and hypertribalistic people on Earth by some margin in my view (there are many, many more primitive peoples but that shouldn't be mistaken for masculinity) - those from around the Dinaric and especially (Northern) Caucasus mountain ranges - have this "nasal signifier" in abundance?

----------


## Ygorcs

> Well, the correlation certainly exists today - light skin and low sexual dimorphism (i.e. a more feminine-looking population) clearly predicts susceptibility to political correctness amongst European nations. As for the whole Viking thing, the vast majority were Danes or Western Norwegians.
> 
> All I'll say regarding the question of causation is that AI is predicting a lot based on facial appearance (though this research is stunted due to political correctness!), so there's clearly something to it - plus, it's pretty obvious that you can tell a lot about a person based on their appearance, or the basics at least.


Spaniards are among the peoples with most progressive ("politically correct" for some) views in Europe - and yet they are not the lightest skinned. Since skin color and sexual dimorphism didn't change at all in the last 1000 years in Europe (or do you dispute that?), and that correlation only works "today", then isn't it obvious that there is little or nothing related to genetically determined phenotype, and instead to changing sociocultural and political trends? North Russians instead are very "badass" not just for European standards (in Brazil when some video is bizarre in a tough and hardcore way some young people joke that it's "like Russia"), yet they are certainly much more lighter-skinned on average than the quite self-restrained and "calm" Portuguese people (of today).

Besides, I think someone should already have told you that correlation means nothing if there is not even a shred of a rational explanation for that correlation being related to some causation, and if there is no control of may other factors that may in fact be much more relevant, with the correlated facts being only incidentally linked to each other. By believing too much in random correlations you may miss the big picture and the really significant patterns.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> Spaniards are among the peoples with most progressive ("politically correct" for some) views in Europe - and yet they are not the lightest skinned. Since skin color and sexual dimorphism didn't change at all in the last 1000 years in Europe (or do you dispute that?), and that correlation only works "today", then isn't it obvious that there is little or nothing related to genetically determined phenotype, and instead to changing sociocultural and political trends? 
> 
> Besides, I think someone should already have told you that correlation means nothing if there is not even a shred of a rational explanation for that correlation being related to some causation, and if there is no control of may other factors that may in fact be much more relevant, with the correlated facts being only incidentally linked to each other. By believing too much in random correlations you may miss the big picture and the really significant patterns.


Spaniards aren't that politically correct compared to Northern Europe, but I don't see how that contradicts what I'm saying. So, compare Spain to Italy then - why is it that the Italians are much more resistive? Conditions are similar, yet Italian culture is more self-preservationist and conservative. The main pro-masculine phenotypic difference is with the nose. How many Furio Giunta's are there in Spain?







Best show ever btw ^^

----------


## [email protected]

I think we've lost the thread here. 

The issue is, IMHO, how did the Swedes of Viking legend and Gustavus Adolphus (the 30 years war for cryin' out loud!) become the nation they are today? 

One easy theory is that wars, and the Swedes decreasing success over time (vs Peter the Great, etc), pushed them in this direction. The Germans and the history of the 20th century inform here as do the Japanese. The latter are proving to be less pacific, but only because they aren't surrounded by an alliance that allows them to ignore reality. 

Now discuss, and without commentary about skin tones and the shape of peoples' noses fer cryin' out loud . . .

----------


## Ygorcs

> Spaniards aren't that politically correct compared to Northern Europe, but I don't see how that contradicts what I'm saying. So, compare Spain to Italy then - why is it that the Italians are much more resistive? Conditions are similar, yet Italian culture is more self-preservationist and conservative. The main pro-masculine phenotypic difference is with the nose. How many Furio Giunta's are there in Spain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Best show ever btw ^^


Oh, I see, in the absence of other correlations then the "major" difference is the frequency of a certain type of nose. Yeah, that makes sense...

----------


## Ygorcs

> I think we've lost the thread here. 
> 
> The issue is, IMHO, how did the Swedes of Viking legend and Gustavus Adolphus (the 30 years war for cryin' out loud!) become the nation they are today? 
> 
> One easy theory is that wars, and the Swedes decreasing success over time (vs Peter the Great, etc), pushed them in this direction. The Germans and the history of the 20th century inform here as do the Japanese. The latter are proving to be less pacific, but only because they aren't surrounded by an alliance that allows them to ignore reality.


Ah now THAT was what I was looking for to talk about! Thanks for some reality check to get the thread back on its trail. :-D

----------


## [email protected]

> Ah now THAT was what I was looking for to talk about! Thanks for some reality check to get the thread back on its trail. :-D


Thanks. Too many discussions here devolve into ethnic discussions when it is not relevant. Is this a European thing? I am "this close" to dumping this site and moving on . . .

Whatever, I think that nations or tribes or individuals, full of p&v, decide to enter the arena of dominance. They try military or economic means and succeed or fail. If they fail, and especially if they fail spectacularly, they decide to move to a different course. This is basic behavioral psychology, given enough negative reinforcement, a subject will change its behavior.

Maybe this new behavior is what we should all aspire to, but the reward structure of today's world says a try for dominance is worth the gamble (see China).

----------


## [email protected]

I hate it when I kill a discussion. I guess nobody wants to talk about Gustavus Adolphus . . .

----------


## Tutkun Arnaut

> I've always thought that Swedes look feminine, and so they act that way: submissive. It sounds too simple to be true, but the more I think about it it does seem to be the case that we can tell a lot about people from their faces. AI can exploit this too, so it's definitely a measurable phenomenon. In nations with low sexual dimorphism, lighter pigmentation etc. political correctness has taken root more strongly. Italians on the whole, in comparison as a good Western European example, are too tribalistic and masculine to be blinded by cognitive dissonances like political correctness. They have a mental boldness about them. And God forbid anybody mentions the Caucasus, they're like Italians but to such an extreme that it turns from charming to scary (though the mafia is hardly charming I suppose).


I don't pretend I know Swedish, but I don't agree with many things they do, like opening their country to everybody. 
I have worked with a Swedish American as a waiter. He had no facial hair and looked 24 years old. He was 45. Young girls were approaching him and he was honest, was immediately telling them he was 45.
As a society they are the cream of Europe, open minded, hard working, honest. South Europe has some of the worst people, lazy, sneaky

----------


## Angela

> I don't pretend I know Swedish, but I don't agree with many things they do, like opening their country to everybody. 
> I have worked with a Swedish American as a waiter. He had no facial hair and looked 24 years old. He was 45. Young girls were approaching him and he was honest, was immediately telling them he was 45.
> As a society they are the cream of Europe, open minded, hard working, honest. South Europe has some of the worst people, lazy, sneaky


You now have four infraction points, so I guess getting banned once was a pleasant experience for you and you want to try it again, you t-roll. 

Keep a civil tongue in your head and your obnoxious, stupid, racist opinions to yourself or this stay will be even shorter.

----------


## Jensen

Reasons you should consider instead of noses and facial hair would be:

Sweden has
A high degree of education and literacy in the population from 1800 and up.
A very high degree of religious (Luteran) internalisation in culture and moral. 
A strong socialist movement around 1900 and up.
An effective rule of law.
A short distance from the citizen to the government

----------


## Angela

> Reasons you should consider instead of noses and facial hair would be:
> 
> Sweden has
> A high degree of education and literacy in the population from 1800 and up.
> A very high degree of religious (Luteran) internalisation in culture and moral. 
> A strong socialist movement around 1900 and up.
> An effective rule of law.
> A short distance from the citizen to the government


Thank you for interjecting some reason into the discussion. Unfortunately, we occasionally get some comments from the "anthrotards" from quasi-racist web sites make an appearance.

Assuming you're actually from Denmark, I don't know if you're aware that the Scandinavian immigrants to the American midwest, places like Minnesota, their rather recently acquired socialist "ideology". It has marked the politics of those areas almost to the present day.

----------


## Northener

> There's always been a lot of talk to the effect that Swedish egalitarianism is perhaps a product of longstanding cultural development.
> 
> If this study is correct, that's not the case.
> 
> See:
> https://academic.oup.com/past/advanc...gtz010/5498958
> 
> "*Abstract*
> 
> During the twentieth century, Sweden became known as a country with an unusually egalitarian distribution of income and wealth, an encompassing welfare state, and an exceptionally strong social democracy. It is commonplace among historians and social scientists to consider these equal outcomes of the twentieth century as the logical end result of a much longer historical trajectory of egalitarianism, from early modern free peasant farmers or from a peculiar Swedish political culture that was egalitarian and consensus-oriented. This article questions the Swedish interpretation of _Sonderweg_. In 1900, Sweden had some of the most unequal voting laws in western Europe, and more severe economic inequality than the United States. This throws the purported continuity from early modern equality to social democratic equality into question. The roots of twentieth-century Swedish egalitarianism lie in exceptionally well-organized popular movements after 1870, with a strong egalitarian counter-hegemonic culture and unusually broad popular participation in politics."


The egalitarian tendency has certainly older roots. Free yeoman farmers was certainly a thing. The reformation another, not only in Sweden but also elsewhere. It broke down the roman-catholic hierarchy, the strongest were pietist movement 'nothing between god and the individual'. This enhanced also things like individual responsibility, the need to be literate etc. I guess that's the reason the popular movements could be successful because the road was already paved.....,

----------


## Angela

> The egalitarian tendency has certainly older roots. Free yeoman farmers was certainly a thing. The reformation another, not only in Sweden but also elsewhere. It broke down the roman-catholic hierarchy, the strongest were pietist movement 'nothing between god and the individual'. This enhanced also things like individual responsibility, the need to be literate etc. I guess that's the reason the popular movements could be successful because the road was already paved.....,


If you're partly referring to Max Weber, I'm not a fan, and I think a lot of recent research falsifies some of his claims, but that's a discussion for another time. 

Ever gotten into all the research into bipartite manorialism? Not that I buy all of it. My training and natural inclination is to always be skeptical of any "isms". :)

See:
https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/tag/b...e-manorialism/

----------


## Northener

I'm more into Mary Douglas:

----------


## Jensen

Angel. I am actually from Denmark, I dont know how I can prove it unless you call me. I saw your hint about Fargo, a film I have seen, but dont remember much off. Except for the snow. Ill revisit it, if they have it on netflix. And yes Im aware of the immigrants. My grandfather went to the Midwest, but came back, which is why Im here, but I still like to bake with Minnesota flour. Others didnt come back, and I have relatives in the US (and australia, and New Zealand).

----------


## Angela

> Angel. I am actually from Denmark, I dont know how I can prove it unless you call me. I saw your hint about Fargo, a film I have seen, but dont remember much off. Except for the snow. Ill revisit it, if they have it on netflix. And yes Im aware of the immigrants. My grandfather went to the Midwest, but came back, which is why Im here, but I still like to bake with Minnesota flour. Others didnt come back, and I have relatives in the US (and australia, and New Zealand).


As I explained in my PM, Jensen, I didn't mean to question your identity or insult you in any way. Indeed, I was trying "not" to insult you. :)

Your English is very good, and if you were a Scandinavian-American, I didn't want to seem to be patronizing you or talking down to you about things you'd be much more informed about than I am. 

I don't know if you've seen this article. It's about Socialism in Minnesota. Half of the counties which voted for Eugene Debs were in Minnesota. I find it very interesting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social...y_of_Minnesota

Many of the Italian immigrants were also Socialists. The trial of Sacco and Vanzetti (anarchists, not socialists) was absolutely huge news in its time. For many reasons, Italian-Americans split, with some becoming more left leaning and others more right leaning. That left leaning, socialist, communist, and anarchist strain was and to some extent continues to be an important part of the politics of the area of Italy from which I come. 

Your history and mine have a point in common. My father's parents came to the U.S. in the second decade of the twentieth century, went to Pennsylvania to start a logging company (they were mountain people), returned to Italy where my father was born, and then decades later my father brought us here. It gives one a rather different perspective.

----------


## [email protected]

> Reasons you should consider instead of noses and facial hair would be:
> 
> Sweden has
> A high degree of education and literacy in the population from 1800 and up.
> A very high degree of religious (Luteran) internalisation in culture and moral. 
> A strong socialist movement around 1900 and up.
> An effective rule of law.
> A short distance from the citizen to the government


I'll add,
- One of the strongest capitalistic economic systems in Europe (it's not just ABBA powering their economy, Eriksen, et al)
- One of the strongest, independent militaries in the world (love the Griffon, Viggen, & Draken aircraft!) 

The Swedes are independent, free-thinkers. I don't agree with all their policies, but it's not my country. Their defense policy proves they have not become "feminized" in any sense.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

I never claimed it was their noses that were directly responsible for anything, that would be ridiculous of course. However, where some of you are overly skeptical about anything somewhat outlandish I tend to trust common instinct a bit more and I have research to back me up (sort of). For monkeys, nose length tracks with social dominance but the study I'm referring to is this:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ful...70491401200101

We found facial features that predicted [social] dominance but not strength... Nose length (N3) predicted dominance significantly (positively), β = 0.26, p = .05 but not strength, β = 0.11, p = .484.

At the very least, it shows that there is general agreement about social dominance based on appearance, so what I'm saying is in-line with what we are programmed to recognise from people's faces. There hasn't been a study yet to confirm whether there is truth to judging people's faces but again that's mainly because of the OBVIOUS political sensitivities there.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...eliefs-IQ.html

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

The Swedes being independent thinkers is laughable by the way, they ARE very individualist in that they are not reliant on the group but at the same time these individuals conform to groupthink. It's somewhat paradoxical but it's part of the so-called Janteloven (most Scandinavians will agree that these laws are correct by the way):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

To me, the biggest freethinkers in Europe are those around the Alpine area, but that's an aside

----------


## BertV

The adventurous tough genes has left sweden a long time ago. 
Just like how the explorers left the netherlands. 

All went to the new world.

----------


## Maleth

I just returned from a vacation in Sweden. I haven't particular noticed men as feminine, just polite and well educated (Is that a feminine thing?). They are very helpful, when you ask for directions they go out of their way, it wasn't just one experience, but many and they are happy to do so. Much quicker then checking things out on the net, locator and so on. They do not want your paper money, its just credit cards, even to use lavatories. Stockholm is a particular city spread on many Islands connected with bridges, so much to see with great museums. A little pricey but well worth a visit.

----------


## [email protected]

I suppose I have a relatively narrow viewpoint, as a tourist, where I noticed the same things as Maleth, above, and the other as a aviator in the US Navy. The Swedes are, from my long familiarity with their Air Force, militarily very good, if not outstanding; there is no lack of "male" virtue in that arena. Their aircraft are world-class and their training is superb. 

Just because they have a paternalistic social system does not mean they have become "feminine." 

The Swedish system is not one I'd want to replicate in America, but it works for them and I congratulate them.

----------


## CrazyDonkey

Swedish neutrality, sitting out every war since 1814, probably has something to do with it. Not wasting the national treasure on useless wars meant all the more to share.

Also, 70% of Swedish workers belong to labor unions, compared to 10.5% in the United States. That helps ensure that rewards get distributed downwards rather than just sucked up.

----------


## Mmiikkii

> Spaniards are among the peoples with most progressive ("politically correct" for some) views in Europe - and yet they are not the lightest skinned


Well. Spain has a very progressive government (by now).
And has been a pioneer with Gay Marriage and Gender Violence Law.
But you should see Vox, the Spanish far right party. It's for sure the most anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQ+ party in the West.

----------


## real expert

> Well. Spain has a very progressive government (by now).


No offence! But in my opinion, liberal progressive governments don't have the best interest of their population in mind.

----------


## Mmiikkii

> No offence! But in my opinion, liberal progressive governments don't have the best interest of their population in mind.


In my opinion. I think that very conservative governments care the less about almost everything important. But they're really agressive against other issues.

----------


## real expert

> In my opinion. I think that very conservative governments care the less about almost everything important. But they're really agressive against other issues.


What is important? Many people that vote for liberal progressive politicians are short-sighted, and don't see what is really important and matters in the long run, or what is at stake. Again, this is only my personal opinion. Plus, concerning being aggressive, liberal progressives are pretty much aggressive when it comes to push their agenda everywhere. These leftists make life more and more complicated, and they take more liberties from the people each time in the pretence for the greater good. That said, don't get me wrong there are many things that I don't like on conservative politicians too, especially when it comes to animal rights, environment or nature protection, etc.

----------


## Ailchu

> What is important? Many people that vote for liberal progressive politicians are short-sighted, and don't see what is really important and matters in the long run, or what is at stake. Again, this is only my personal opinion. Plus, concerning being aggressive, liberal progressives are pretty much aggressive when it comes to push their agenda everywhere. These leftists make life more and more complicated, and they take more liberties from the people each time in the pretence for the greater good. That said, don't get me wrong there are many things that I don't like on conservative politicians too, especially when it comes to animal rights, environment or nature protection, etc.


what is important and matters in the long run?




> That said, don't get me wrong there are many things that I don't like on conservative politicians too, especially when it comes to animal rights, environment or nature protection, etc.


not very shortsighted things imo. those would be things that are important for me or that would matter in the long run so i am more often than not, not voting for conservatives.

----------

