Liberal/Progressive vs. Conservative Responses to Sandy Disaster

[NOTE: this post may be long, but I would ask that you read it all.  I think, at least for those for whom I wrote it, you’ll find it will be worth your time.]


I just do not understand how we can have such a stark difference as these and still have people defending the Liberal/Progressive ideology. I suppose I never will:

Bloomberg Diverts Food, Generators from Devastated Staten Island to NYC Marathon

Fresh off his “climate disruption”-driven endorsement of President Obama, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has chosen to divert critical food supplies and power generators from desperate residents of Staten Island to Sunday’s New York City Marathon.


Incredible Stories and Pics: This Is What Beck’s Mercury One Charity Found (and Is Doing) When It Went to Help Hurricane Victims

Mercury One staffer Adam Blaylock describes Kerry’s reaction to Coney Island:

One of the things that stood out most to Kerry and those that were with him was the silence of the media. While meeting with members of the New York Christian Resource Center (NYCRC), Kerry learned that no one else had visited that Coney Island community to offer help – no relief organizations or emergency management organizations. They had been left to fend for themselves.

“I think people hear about the flooding of New York City and think of rich people with big homes,” Kerry said. “Yes, that has happened. And yes, they need our help, too. But this area was devastated. No food, no water. Roaming armed gangs. We heard sirens from the moment we arrived until we left. I could not believe how quickly the chaos started.”

Some of the church leaders Kerry met with had worked with Mercury One and Operation Blessing earlier this year during a food drive connected to the Restoring Love event on July 28th, where 14 tractor trailers of food were sent to communities across the nation, including one on Coney Island.

In a video message to Glenn, Jim Esposito of the NYCRC commented on Mercury One’s assistance with the food drive and expressed gratitude for the additional assistance after hurricane Sandy:

“You have no idea what you guys have brought to us today – the hope that’s descended here in Coney Island, Brooklyn and beyond. You were the first people to come to this community, to this church and to see what we need. And that’s God’s honest truth. They didn’t know where they were going to turn today. And I’m glad that you were there. Thank you so much, sir.”

Personally, I think the difference is connected to the FACT that the Liberal/Progressives demand we all work through government where Beck and his people are working through the Church. But then, I suppose that is part of why I will likely never understand…  All I know is that this is a trend, not an isolated anecdotal story:

Romney 2011 taxes: Mitt gives more to charity than President Obama, Joe Biden

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was far more generous to charities than President Barack Obama or Vice President Joe Biden last year, both in dollar terms and as a percentage of income, tax return data Romney’s campaign released Friday indicate.

Romney and his wife, Ann, gave 29.4 percent of their income to charity in 2011, donating $4,020,772 out of the $13,696,951 they took in.

Obama and first lady Michelle Obama gave 21.8 percent of their income to charitable organizations last year, donating $172,130 out of the $789,674 they made.

Biden and his wife, Jill, gave 1.5 percent of their income away in 2011, with charitable donations totaling $5,540 out of $379,035.

But then, if people bothered to spend a few minutes to look into this (like I just did for you), then this wouldn’t be a surprise because it just reflects the objective reality (i.e. facts) of this correlation:

Surprise! Conservatives are more generous than liberals

Thomas Sowell captured this overall sentiment in a Nov. 2006 Human Events piece when he wrote, “One of the most pervasive political visions of our time is the vision of liberals as compassionate and conservatives as less caring.”  While myths surrounding leftist giving and volunteerism continue to be perpetuated, American researchers have taken a pretty clear and concise look at this issue and the case is closed: Conservatives out-give and out-volunteer the opposition.  Don’t believe me?  Examine the facts.


How Religious Affiliation Affects Charitable Giving

The Chronicle of Philanthropy released a fascinating survey this week on how (and how much) America donates to charitable organizations. One of the most interesting findings shows that those who tend to give the most live in more religious areas. A substantial portion of giving in the U.S., you see, comes in the form of tithing to churches. When religion is taken out of the equation, the charitable landscape alters considerably.


Are Conservatives More Religious, and Liberals More Spiritual?

The more religious a person is, the more conservative he is, and this relationship is strongly mediated by the value placed on tradition—respect for customs and institutions. But, even though religiousness and spirituality are highly correlated, the more spiritual a person is the more liberal he is. This relationship is mediated by the value placed on universalism—social tolerance and concern for everyone’s welfare.

As with previous studies, conservatives were more conscientious (organized and self-disciplined), while liberals were more agreeable and more open to new ideas and experiences. The trend of conservatives being more religious and liberals being more spiritual held even when controlling for these personality factors, and when controlling for age, gender, and socioeconomic status.

[NOTE: Be VERY careful NOT to equate “spiritual” with “religious:” they are two VERY different concepts.]


Why Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals

WHO is happier about life — liberals or conservatives? The answer might seem straightforward. After all, there is an entire academic literature in the social sciences dedicated to showing conservatives as naturally authoritarian, dogmatic, intolerant of ambiguity, fearful of threat and loss, low in self-esteem and uncomfortable with complex modes of thinking. And it was the candidate Barack Obama in 2008 who infamously labeled blue-collar voters “bitter,” as they “cling to guns or religion.” Obviously, liberals must be happier, right?

Wrong. Scholars on both the left and right have studied this question extensively, and have reached a consensus that it is conservatives who possess the happiness edge. Many data sets show this. For example, the Pew Research Center in 2006 reported that conservative Republicans were 68 percent more likely than liberal Democrats to say they were “very happy” about their lives. This pattern has persisted for decades. The question isn’t whether this is true, but why.

By any objective measure, it would seem that the Liberal/Progressive path is — in fact — the wrong path, and the evidence supports this conclusion.  Now, if it pointed in the other direction, the Left would tell us it is based on “science,” and, therefore, we can’t argue with their conclusion.  Somehow, because the “science” seems to be against them, I suspect they will disagree with the conclusion.  To me, that in itself is a condemnation of the liberal/progressive mindset: characterized by a stubborn refusal to accept objective reality and irrational adherence to their own beliefs instead.

10 thoughts on “Liberal/Progressive vs. Conservative Responses to Sandy Disaster

  1. Black3, could you do me a favor and help me out, i am not really getting what you are saying about “spiritual” and “religious”. I consider my self both very spiritual and very religious.

    • Sure, but please allow me to say that I do not mean this comment to be an attack or judgment on anyone.

      OK, FOR ME, religious generally implies a belief in a transcendent and omnipotent creator.

      However, spiritual — where it “can” be used in conjunction with a belief in a supreme god — is generally connected to a more universal acceptance of something other than just this world. It is usually connected more to mysticism and a belief in supernatural powers that are or more in line with the notion of a living universe than with a Creator.

      I hope this makes sense. If not, let me know and I’ll try to clarify it further, maybe provide an example or illustration.

      BTW: Thanks for asking — seriously 🙂

  2. I’m pretty sure M. wrote a piece on the generosity of conservatives, but I can’t remember the title. Do you know what I’m talking about? It had this state graph…..

    B., it sounds as though your definition of being spiritual is being agnostic.

    • B., it sounds as though your definition of being spiritual is being agnostic.

      No, not at all. My definition of spiritual includes those people — ALL of them — who believe in “a higher power,” but not necessarily in a single, all-powerful Creator. Gaea worship (earth as god) would be an example, so would Wickens, those who think we are all “one with the universe,” etc. Mind you, I AM NOT JUDGING ANYONE, just trying to explain that “spiritual” tends to excuse, omit or ignore the side of religion a great many people wish to escape: that God has rules and those rules must be obeyed if we wish to avoid the consequences. many (not all) spiritual people do not have that problem in their belief system(s).

  3. Maybe;
    …. spirituality is what each individual’s soul feels and “knows” whereas religion is an attempt to explain / understand / teach / live in accordance with “our creator’s intent; in an human-intellectual way about spirituality….

  4. Thank you for clarification, Black3. Could it be that most of the Neo-Pagan religions are newly reconstituted and so rules that have been in effect for Christianity, Islam, and Judaism for centuries just have not been codified in their belief system?

    Just the other day, I was explaining why the eating of dog flesh was forbidden in certain Celtic Pagan belief systems, while that may seem like a small thing, it is taken very seriously, albeit not many places in the West sell dog for eating, outside the White House. 😛 Sorry I couldn’t resist. 😀

    • New Age stuff? Yes, that could be part of it, but then, this has been around forever. Ecclesiastes really was correct: there’s nothing new under the sun. Most of us are just too self-absorbed to notice (and I do not excuse myself from this accusation 🙂 )

  5. I’m afraid that’s an inaccurate view of the difference. Spiritual means belief in supernatural or mystical things, usually a creator god, but It can also mean stuff like auras and other nonsense. Religious means that you place value on the dogma and trappings of an organised religion. Stuff like communion, confession and saying Amen etc. the founding fathers of the USA were spiritual (which is why they reference “the Creator” or “the Almighty”), but not religious (which is why there is no reference to God or the Bible in the US Constitution). Unfortunately most American conservatives don’t know this stuff which is why they use the word “the Almighty” to mean “God” even though they are different things.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.