>>725280025
>I'm pretty sure the #1 predictor of the left-right spectrum is trait openness
You're right. Openness, followed by agreeableness, followed strongly by educational attainment.
Rightists are, for the most part, closed-minded, unpleasant, stupid people. The only exception being that narrow segment who're high-openness, disagreeable, and educated.
(The big problem with left wingers is that they're too agreeable to come out and skull-measure their opponents, so they confuse cause and effect blame stupid things like "Misinformation" for right-wing attitudes rather than realizing that "Misinformation" is the market responding to stupid people demanding stupid media...)
>>725280246
Twisting and turning to show you're capable of defending an idea that runs against common sense signals your intelligence. Getting worked up that it's "wrong" shows you're not smart or agreeable enough to play the game. The fact that you can or will not play along is the ultimate point of the exercise.
In general, the left like ideology and the right likes conspiracy. The left will explain why structural social forces cause every disparity in economic outcomes between groups, the right will explain that a cabal of Jews are trying to transition your children and let immigrants murder your kids. The former has flaws but the latter is not an explanation that will wash with smart people. Not only is it wrong, it's patently stupid. No ideas to play with.
>>725280490
Most people are pro-status-quo where it matters, they're just jostling for position inside it. You should think of it as fashion: people still say ACAB, but "abolish the police" is as unfashionable as the iPhone 12. Now the hip thing to talk about is Palestine.
Saints Row 2022 flopped because it was uncool, not because left/liberal ideas are uncool. The fact that uncool people are incapable of pretending to be cool doesn't make coolness go away. (In-fact, the main advantage of being cool is showing that you're not them!)
