Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor
irst of all, let’s state the obvious.
People vote for their own interests. Morality is simply a balance of our interests and political correctness.
Not stealing, for example, can be thought of as morality. However, it’s also selfish interests. If we steal from each other we will all be worse off right?
Now why middle class vote for republican?
There are 3 things republican stand for:
- Meritocracy in Business (low tax, eliminate minimum wage, free trades, etc.)
- Socialism in reproductive success (monogamy, no prostitution, no concubinage, no abortion).
- Against fun (no drug, no porn, no fun)….
Think about it.
Typical republicans are diligent hard working low wealth people with high income. In other words, middle class.
Meritocracy in business helps the middle class.
It doesn’t help the poor, that will benefit from wealth redistribution. It doesn’t help the rich that don’t pay tax anyway. Google, for example, only pays 1-2% of income taxes. Every year, Google’s founder wealth go up and up and most of which not taxed. I won’t be surprised if those founders are liberal. They’re not getting screwed by tax hammer anyway.
So it’s natural that the poor most eager to be rich are the one that got screwed by tax the most. That’s republican. Free market is the most pro worker economic system in the world. However, it mainly benefit the smartest most diligent workers. Not sure about the smartest, but republicans tend to be more diligent.
The super rich improve their wealth mainly by increased land valuation (not taxed), or increased assets valuation (also not tax). The small business owners and workers improve their wealth mainly by income tax. Now, try to tax land and capital instead of income, and I bet the demographic will shift.
What about socialism in gene pool survival?
Notice that sexual norms in western civilization tend to have one outcome.
Everybody has the same number of children no matter how rich they are, how attractive they are, or whether they want to have children or not.
If you are poor, there is welfare. If you are rich, child support is set proportional to man’s wealth.
If you are ugly, there is monogamy. If you are a handsome stud, there is monogamy too.
If you really want children, monogamy restricts the number of children you have.
If you don’t even want children, anti abortion laws tend to get you babies anyway. I know anti abortion laws are history, but still, the message is that somehow everyone should have the exact same reproductive success.
That’s easy. The poorest people wants more money, not more children. If you are very poor, the last thing they want is to have more children. That’s why they commit abortion. The poorest people, are not republican.
Surely the poor are not as eager to get married and breed more children.
Somehow republicans think that the very poor got to have children so they can latter complain about how evil is government taking all their money to fed those children. Also prohibiting abortion may help their other value, namely marriage with monogamy.
Why should richer males settle for one woman? They can attract more. They can afford more. To them, life long monogamous marriage sucks. Why be monogamous if so many women want you? Again, the middle class life style where every body have one and only one wife and produce 2.5 children doesn’t fit the very poor and the very rich.
The middle class have to compete against super rich men for mate. Obviously they are more eager to embrace gene pool survival socialism.
As for no fun?
Well, I saw enough pattern to see that people want to prohibit things that they don’t want anyway to screw over those who do want those things. So people that don’t like dope will want to prohibit dope. People that don’t like porn, will prohibit porn. Basically if it hurts others more than it hurts themselves, that’s what people do.
Diligent working class people have little use of fun like drugs and porn. So they prohibit them to prevent others from being happy.
If you think about it, the poor socialist liberals are no difference. They condemn wealth because they’re not interested in making them.