While jealousy and the desire to attain a dominant position and to remain on top are perfectly natural human emotions (and probably necessary for survival, especially in more primitive times), the extent of this empathy/lack of empathy for others is likely at the root of our political/sociological differences.
[/quote]
Wait – you can’t really be making the sweeping generalization that conservatives are less empathetic (are you? maybe I am misunderstanding). In fact, the heightened sensitivity among conservatives identified in one of the studies above would probably suggest the opposite. I have voted for presidents of both political parties and consider myself an independent. I don’t think there is a difference in ultimate goodness between members of the two parties. I do think there is a difference in terms of perspective. I also think that each party has its share of bad eggs, and when it comes time to criticize, those bad eggs make good targets.[/quote]
Yes, I am saying that, but I am not associating empathy with “goodness.”
A person can lack empathy but still have a strong drive to “do the right thing.” A person can be empathetic, but still commit horrible crimes (probably more likely to feel justified if they are crimes of passion).
IMO, conservatives tend to think in more binary terms: good/bad, right/wrong, deserving/undeserving, lazy/hard-working, bound for heaven/bound for hell, etc. Liberals tend to focus more on the grey in between: the background and conditions that might have led this person (or this group of people) to think or act in this particular way; the historical, geographical, cultural, or genetic causes of these behaviors and beliefs; etc., etc.
IMO, a more conservative person will look at a situation within the context of that more binary world, not really trying to feel and fully understand the background of others in an attempt to better understand why things have turned out they way they have. They are more inclined to assess things based on a very superficial cause-and-effect relationship like, “being lazy makes you unsuccessful,” instead of trying to determine if there are other reasons for that person’s difficulty in completing tasks or achieving some other metric of success — might he/she be suffering from emotional/mental/physical disabilities, or do they have other factors in their lives that might play a more important role than just “laziness.”
Conservatives are more likely to take personal credit for their success rather than acknowledging the role of luck (and other people, among other things) in their lives, IMHO, while a more liberal person is probably more likely to acknowledge the fact that they are not individually responsible for the successes (or failures) in their lives — giving more credit to coworkers, good timing, intellectual or physical gifts, the role of public infrastructure, etc…luck.
Bringing this back around to why Jewish people are more likely to vote for democrats, I think it has a lot to do with siding with the underdog (as they’ve been the underdog for so long) and having a more philosophical, as opposed to a dogmatic, approach to life.
