Why are all developing countries socially conservative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole world is socially conservative, you racist dipshit, including the United States. You still haven’t figured out that the reason why the Republicans are so successful at “culture wars” is because most people agree with them?

I’m a Democrat for reasons other than social issues, but if I was voting on the definition of “woman,” trans ideology in schools, the kind of family structure that is ideal, and other social issues, then I would be Republican.

I'm not really sure how republicans are successful in culture wars given the social spectrum in our country has consistently moved left since our founding. republicans have lost most culture wars and will probably continue to do so. they've been successful at rolling back abortion rights - but that's because of the courts...not because the American public supports it.

The "whole world" isn't socially conservative at all - the prosperous and democratic west isn't. Right wingers ended up perennially fighting a losing battle post-WWII when education levels in the west started to curb upwards...the secularism that predictably started to increase as people became more educated just fuelled it. High levels of educational attainment (and the attendant increase in secularism) are obviously inconsistent with social conservatism. A big reason why right wingers want to keep people dumb and uber religious.

as far as things like the "definition of women" and "trans ideology" - these are not issues that occupy the minds of most working Americans. They're mainly the obsession of the Very Online and Cable News Addicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole world is socially conservative, you racist dipshit, including the United States. You still haven’t figured out that the reason why the Republicans are so successful at “culture wars” is because most people agree with them?

I’m a Democrat for reasons other than social issues, but if I was voting on the definition of “woman,” trans ideology in schools, the kind of family structure that is ideal, and other social issues, then I would be Republican.

I'm not really sure how republicans are successful in culture wars given the social spectrum in our country has consistently moved left since our founding. republicans have lost most culture wars and will probably continue to do so. they've been successful at rolling back abortion rights - but that's because of the courts...not because the American public supports it.

The "whole world" isn't socially conservative at all - the prosperous and democratic west isn't. Right wingers ended up perennially fighting a losing battle post-WWII when education levels in the west started to curb upwards...the secularism that predictably started to increase as people became more educated just fuelled it. High levels of educational attainment (and the attendant increase in secularism) are obviously inconsistent with social conservatism. A big reason why right wingers want to keep people dumb and uber religious.

as far as things like the "definition of women" and "trans ideology" - these are not issues that occupy the minds of most working Americans. They're mainly the obsession of the Very Online and Cable News Addicted.

Oh, honey child ignorance reeks through every sentence of your post.

I suggest you spend a few years living in the real world, aka not the little two block bubble you live in.

FYI most of the progressive victories in the US were through the courts, not social acceptance. Which is one reason why the abortion rights roll backs haven't generated as much controversy or anger as you'd expect. And things like transgender and the biological meaning of women are not exactly being ignored either.

The progressives are extremely ideological, so they fail to notice how much of what they believe in is little more than religious fantasies in different forms and why it's so divisive and unpalatable. So it's a bit hypocritical to see them lecture at socially conservative religious nations, when they're just as religious themselves, just in different ways.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, it's because a lot are hardworking people and don't have time to concern themselves with non-issues like allowing men to play women's sports.

For a lot of them it's about survival, getting enough money to live and in a lot of cases dealing with suppressive leaders. They also know the Starbucks lululemon moms that post flags on their Instagram profile with their slacktivism doesn't do crap. They preach about helping from their iPhones made in Chinese labor camps and expect to be taken seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole world is socially conservative, you racist dipshit, including the United States. You still haven’t figured out that the reason why the Republicans are so successful at “culture wars” is because most people agree with them?

I’m a Democrat for reasons other than social issues, but if I was voting on the definition of “woman,” trans ideology in schools, the kind of family structure that is ideal, and other social issues, then I would be Republican.

I'm not really sure how republicans are successful in culture wars given the social spectrum in our country has consistently moved left since our founding. republicans have lost most culture wars and will probably continue to do so. they've been successful at rolling back abortion rights - but that's because of the courts...not because the American public supports it.

The "whole world" isn't socially conservative at all - the prosperous and democratic west isn't. Right wingers ended up perennially fighting a losing battle post-WWII when education levels in the west started to curb upwards...the secularism that predictably started to increase as people became more educated just fuelled it. High levels of educational attainment (and the attendant increase in secularism) are obviously inconsistent with social conservatism. A big reason why right wingers want to keep people dumb and uber religious.

as far as things like the "definition of women" and "trans ideology" - these are not issues that occupy the minds of most working Americans. They're mainly the obsession of the Very Online and Cable News Addicted.

+1
Oh, honey child ignorance reeks through every sentence of your post.

I suggest you spend a few years living in the real world, aka not the little two block bubble you live in.

FYI most of the progressive victories in the US were through the courts, not social acceptance. Which is one reason why the abortion rights roll backs haven't generated as much controversy or anger as you'd expect. And things like transgender and the biological meaning of women are not exactly being ignored either.

The progressives are extremely ideological, so they fail to notice how much of what they believe in is little more than religious fantasies in different forms and why it's so divisive and unpalatable. So it's a bit hypocritical to see them lecture at socially conservative religious nations, when they're just as religious themselves, just in different ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole world is socially conservative, you racist dipshit, including the United States. You still haven’t figured out that the reason why the Republicans are so successful at “culture wars” is because most people agree with them?

I’m a Democrat for reasons other than social issues, but if I was voting on the definition of “woman,” trans ideology in schools, the kind of family structure that is ideal, and other social issues, then I would be Republican.

I'm not really sure how republicans are successful in culture wars given the social spectrum in our country has consistently moved left since our founding. republicans have lost most culture wars and will probably continue to do so. they've been successful at rolling back abortion rights - but that's because of the courts...not because the American public supports it.

The "whole world" isn't socially conservative at all - the prosperous and democratic west isn't. Right wingers ended up perennially fighting a losing battle post-WWII when education levels in the west started to curb upwards...the secularism that predictably started to increase as people became more educated just fuelled it. High levels of educational attainment (and the attendant increase in secularism) are obviously inconsistent with social conservatism. A big reason why right wingers want to keep people dumb and uber religious.

as far as things like the "definition of women" and "trans ideology" - these are not issues that occupy the minds of most working Americans. They're mainly the obsession of the Very Online and Cable News Addicted.

Oh, honey child ignorance reeks through every sentence of your post.

I suggest you spend a few years living in the real world, aka not the little two block bubble you live in.

FYI most of the progressive victories in the US were through the courts, not social acceptance. Which is one reason why the abortion rights roll backs haven't generated as much controversy or anger as you'd expect. And things like transgender and the biological meaning of women are not exactly being ignored either.

The progressives are extremely ideological, so they fail to notice how much of what they believe in is little more than religious fantasies in different forms and why it's so divisive and unpalatable. So it's a bit hypocritical to see them lecture at socially conservative religious nations, when they're just as religious themselves, just in different ways.

You seem confused. The topic of the thread is "why are all developing countries socially conservative'. The answer is the combination of poverty and extreme religion. You may not like this but it's the truth.

There is a reason that secularism is correlated with level of educational attainment.

[Anonymous]

Being socially conservative (aka repressive & oppressive) is what keeps them developing rather than developed. Places that keep women and minorities and the poor down are inherently anti-intellectual and resistant to modernization in any form. They intentionally lag behind economically as well as culturally. It’s not just a developing country thing - think about Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, much of Appalachia. What is it that holds them back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being socially conservative (aka repressive & oppressive) is what keeps them developing rather than developed. Places that keep women and minorities and the poor down are inherently anti-intellectual and resistant to modernization in any form. They intentionally lag behind economically as well as culturally. It’s not just a developing country thing - think about Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, much of Appalachia. What is it that holds them back?

Depends on what you consider Appalachia, but globalization is what annihilated parts of Ohio & Pennsylvania.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being socially conservative (aka repressive & oppressive) is what keeps them developing rather than developed. Places that keep women and minorities and the poor down are inherently anti-intellectual and resistant to modernization in any form. They intentionally lag behind economically as well as culturally. It’s not just a developing country thing - think about Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, much of Appalachia. What is it that holds them back?

Depends on what you consider Appalachia, but globalization is what annihilated parts of Ohio & Pennsylvania.

Because they hadn’t modernized or diversified their labor-intensive manufacturing economies while the world changed. Those old manufacturing jobs were lost to technology more than to globalization. Pittsburgh successfully transitioned to finance, health, education economies to go with modernized manufacturing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they need to enforce rigid gender roles so that they can continue to rely on free labor from women.

Having lived in culturally conservative countries, women were the biggest enforcers of the traditional roles.

That doesn't mean PP is incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they need to enforce rigid gender roles so that they can continue to rely on free labor from women.

Having lived in culturally conservative countries, women were the biggest enforcers of the traditional roles.

Were they educated?

Some are. Quite highly so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they need to enforce rigid gender roles so that they can continue to rely on free labor from women.

Having lived in culturally conservative countries, women were the biggest enforcers of the traditional roles.

Were they educated?

Some are. Quite highly so.

Bad faith rebuttal - anecdotes aren't data. The correlation between educational attainment and views on gender norms isn't 1:1. It's the same reason you might find some low-income folks with a master's degree, but on the whole, they vastly out-earn people with only a high school education.

[Anonymous]

Religion. Religion is stupid and offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Religion. Religion is stupid and offensive.

+1 Jeezus freak bible beaters are the reason we’re always lagging behind Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they need to enforce rigid gender roles so that they can continue to rely on free labor from women.

Having lived in culturally conservative countries, women were the biggest enforcers of the traditional roles.

There's a difference between power and authority. Women might have power, but they have little authority to enact real changes. It's the same bullsh** reasoning that keeps women out of the priesthood in Catholicism. So long as men can convince women that power is as important as authority, few substantial changes will be made to empower women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because they need to enforce rigid gender roles so that they can continue to rely on free labor from women.

This.

If you don't have enough wage-paying jobs to go around it's good to keep half of your population unemployed and dependent.