>>20984315>What does it mean to be socially right-wing?at a minimum it typically implies traditionalism, belief in the importance or desirability of hierarchy, belief that "nature" or "natural law" are authoritative and should be respected, belief that the ingroup must be valued much more highly than everyone else, fear and paranoia towards anyone outside the ingroup
the far-left, in contrast, goes out of their way to say hierarchy must necessarily be bad and dismantled wherever it is suspected to appear, that nature is unimportant and everything is based on social factors and culture, that the ingroup is loathsome due to fear that people in it might think of themselves as an ingroup. this is a perhaps morally admirable but essentially mentally ill way of thinking
but the left and even far-left are at least somewhat rooted in reality and respect for humanity. in practice, social rightism typically leads to belief in spurious conspiracy theories, hatred of people for things one has no control over (and nonsensical hatred for other things people do have control over), valuing of ridiculous falsehoods (like that morality should be dictated by mythology), valorization of tyranny and cuckoldry towards power (see: trump supporters), and a depraved substitution of ethics with aesthetics
social right-wingers are essentially primitive, brutish animals running off hardware and software from 30,000 years ago. such a neurology and psychology offers utility during times of dire war but in all other times sees and seeks war where there is none
>>20984353it's a correlation, pal. obviously not all social right-wingers are unintelligent. just on average they're a lot less intelligent than people who aren't socially right-wing
