What is the mindset behind conservatives?

[d3crypt]

Can a conservative explain it to me. To me it just seems like they don't want anything to change, are ignorant, and just love mediocraty.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I don't think there are many conservatives or liberals here to give an answer... Oh who am I kidding :lol: ;)1

[Decolonize The Left]

Can a conservative explain it to me. To me it just seems like they don't want anything to change, are ignorant, and just love mediocraty.

Ask a conservative?

[d3crypt]

Ask a conservative?

Thats why i put it in opposing ideologies. But i guess we ban everyone, so i doubt this will get answered

[Taters]

sounds circle-jerky to me but whatever


Adherence to 'traditional' Judeo-Christian morality
Belief in minimal state interference in the market
Belief in 'personal responsibility' - which translates to the preference for private charity over gov't welfare
A distrust of 'big government' and, sometimes, 'big business'
A general feeling that the government should promote their morality


...and some other stuff I can't think of right now. All in all, American conservatism is just another petty bourgeois ideology promoting its own version of capitalism and its own ideal state.

and I highly doubt there are any conservatives hanging around in OI.

[Decolonize The Left]

Honestly, this is one of those things you can figure out with Wikipedia.

[d3crypt]

Honestly, this is one of those things you can figure out with Wikipedia.

I understand what they believe. I just can't see why. I understand liberalism, as i used to be one. I get "libertarianism" as i know some so called libertarians. I understand fascists because i am good friends with one. But i don't see how anyone could really buy all the bullshit conservatives spew out.

[Fourth Internationalist]

You are good friends with a fascist? O_o

[d3crypt]

You are good friends with a fascist? O_o
Yah. he is a dumb ass, but he is my friend. He knows fascism is stupid, he just supports it because he wants to be a dictator. I think its just a reflection of insecurity. He seems sort of like Mussolini. I think he even has a stormfront account.

[d3crypt]

You are good friends with a fascist? O_o
We actually get along well though. We have a good amount in common despite him being a nazi fascist scum. He supports racism because he thinks it would benefit him, although surprisingly he is not anti-semetic.

[#FF0000]

Yah. he is a dumb ass, but he is my friend. He knows fascism is stupid, he just supports it because he wants to be a dictator. I think its just a reflection of insecurity. He seems sort of like Mussolini. I think he even has a stormfront account.


We actually get along well though. We have a good amount in common despite him being a nazi fascist scum. He supports racism because he thinks it would benefit him, although surprisingly he is not anti-semetic.

:mellow:

[Rural Comrade]

Living in rural areas (hence my name) I think I understand why they believe it. Of course most of them are workers (Agricultural and Mechanical). They no nothing else, nor nothing better. I doubt they would bickerer under true communism because it would let them work out their days.

[d3crypt]

:mellow:
to explain it better we like the same music, movies, games, etc. however we argue all the time

[The Idler]

Mostly ignorance, fear and self-interest but also a belief that human nature is fundamentally evil (as opposed to there being no such thing).

[d3crypt]

Mostly ignorance, fear and self-interest but also a belief that human nature is fundamentally evil (as opposed to there being no such thing).

That makes some sense i guess. I can see why it would be so popular then. The world is a pretty dark place. I can see why people believe that.

[The Idler]

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I always find it weird when socialists talk about "tory scum". It reduces it to some sort of tribal thing and leftists should know better.

[Bostana]

The republican brain:
Q2fYKBIvq-o

[NGNM85]

Who are we talking about, here? Most self-identified 'conservatives', today, are reactionaries.
If Ann Coulter, and Michael Savage are to be classified as; ' conservatives', this only signifies that the term has been evacuated of all meaning. Just another example of the Orwellian doublespeak that permeates mainstream, contemporary political discourse.

[33_PERCENT_GOD]

They believe that what is good for business is good for everybody -- "the rising tide lifts all boats"

[liberlict]

Can a conservative explain it to me. To me it just seems like they don't want anything to change, are ignorant, and just love mediocraty.

What is a 'conservative'? These labels are useless, imo. I don't consider myself a conservative, but perhaps some other people do. The fact is that conservatives are so diverse that it's useless to homogenize them; the same for radicals. These labels don't aid discourse at all, they are worse than useless. You need to define a political platform. Most platforms are a combination of forward-looking and backward-looking, future and past. Communists accepted.

[tachosomoza]

The mindset behind reactionaries? Fear, maintenance of a status quo that privileges them, and hatred, when you cut down to the bone.

[The Idler]

In democracies, the vast majority aren't privileged by conservatism, but support it anyway.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

The mindset behind reactionaries? Fear, maintenance of a status quo that privileges them, and hatred, when you cut down to the bone.

Sort of like the racist drivel you spewed about ethnic Chechens and Dagestanis in the aftermath of the Boston bombings.

[tachosomoza]

In democracies, the vast majority aren't privileged by conservatism, but support it anyway.

In the United States, the majority of voters of ethnic European, non Jewish descent in the Southern states see themselves benefiting from conservatism and voting Republican because the Democrats (the liberal party) extended voting rights and civil rights in general to the African descended people of that region through federal authority and legislation, and the conservatives seek to roll back that progress and restore a semblance of white hegemony in that region. Their mindset historically has been that the blacks must be kept as a socially deprived, uneducated peasant class because if not, the whites would be violently ousted and the blacks would gain control over the Southern states through numbers alone. The Southern whites see the liberals as destroying their way of life and the conservatives as helping them restore their hegemony and ethnic privilege. They resent the fact that they are under federal watch and that blacks are not shut out through state and local legislation, that is why they are so keen on states' rights.

Basically, they agitate against their own self interest because of ethnic hatred and malice.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Many of the southern whites who vote for the GOP (conservative voters) aren't actually voting to maintain or expand privilege, because actually voting for southern Democrats would probably benefit them much more economically-speaking. And monetary gain...that's an incredibly powerful incentive, more powerful in today's era than race or anything else, really, at least here in the USA but probably in most places.

The reasons why southern whites vote against their economic self-interest are actually somewhat complex and has been the subject of entire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What's_the_Matter_with_Kansas%3F) books (http://www.oxfordamerican.org/articles/2012/oct/09/book-review-deer-hunting-jesus/)

[smellincoffee]

We can't predict the consequences of our actions, so it's best to minimize actions, especially drastic ones, and stick with beliefs, institutions, etc. which have proven their worth over time.

This is the intellectual basis of conservatism, and to the extent that someone is conservative for that reason I can respect their views without agreeing, because the law of unintended consequences is unassailable. Regardless of how rational we claim to be, regardless of how well-thought our plans, something will go wrong. Life is complicated. Subsidize grain to keep food cheap for Americans? Witness high-fructose corn syrup becoming a universal additive, and the health of Americans plummet. Free trade to get cheap imports from abroad? Witness not only the demise of local factories, but the destruction of unsubsidized farmers in Mexico, and their mass migration into the United States. You can't get away from chaos.

On the other hand, I do not think most conservatives are that way for intellectual reasons. They react negatively toward change out of instinct, for the same reason you or I would react if we were suddenly transplanted into an alien environment. New ground means new dangers. It means unknown peril. The old ground was known: we could avoid the predators' hunting trails, the quicksand. But the unknown country? Death could be anywhere. I would not be surprised if the split in the worldview of conservatives and progressives had a genetic basis: among any population of animals, are there not creatures who will push forward into new territory? Sometimes intrepid explorers dies. Sometimes they thrive. Sometimes cautious conservatives die. Sometimes they are vindicated. Nature plays tricks on every world view.

My grievance lies not with conservatives, but with people who are not conscious of their motivations. A gulf lies between error and ignorance.

I have to try and understand conservatives because of where I live, but what really bothers me is their view of humans as inherently wretched, and their veneration of custom and habit. That, as a dyed in the wool freethinker, I don't get.

[connoros]

"The state is the thing keeping people from enjoying freedom..."

Yes, exactly!

"...so we need to minimize state intervention in the private sector. Then everyone will have complete freedom!"

Oh my god.

[Kingfish]

Can a conservative explain it to me. To me it just seems like they don't want anything to change, are ignorant, and just love mediocraty.

Economically I think its less of them loving mediocrity more-so that they believe the current system is in fact a meritocracy. That is the only way I can understand their feelings towards the disadvantaged which seem to range from apathy- to outright contempt.

[d3crypt]

I hate them more than facists. The conservatives are a powerful force. The facists are just a joke and laughing stock.

[Red Economist]

If you mean 'conservative' as in conserving existing institutions and traditions, generally I think that the mindset is a fear of change or if you want to be more flattering a "love" of stability or order. Conservatives tend to emphasize the incompleteness of our knowledge of society, the uncertainty of the outcomes of social change and the tendency of human beings towards irrational behavior, driven by emotions rather than reason. Some might argue that human beings are inherently bad and therefore change is always a 'slippery slope' (although that doesn't explain how the institutions are 'good' in the first place).

Or as Sheldon Cooper put it: "No, it's not going to be fine. Change is never fine. They say it is, but it's not. "

[d3crypt]

If you mean 'conservative' as in conserving existing institutions and traditions, generally I think that the mindset is a fear of change or if you want to be more flattering a "love" of stability or order. Conservatives tend to emphasize the incompleteness of our knowledge of society, the uncertainty of the outcomes of social change and the tendency of human beings towards irrational behavior, driven by emotions rather than reason. Some might argue that human beings are inherently bad and therefore change is always a 'slippery slope' (although that doesn't explain how the institutions are 'good' in the first place).

Or as Sheldon Cooper put it: "No, it's not going to be fine. Change is never fine. They say it is, but it's not. "

Thats pretty damn depressing. I don't think i will every fully understand the mindset. But they have tricked half of America into believing there is nothing better than what we have now.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

"Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others, called reactionaries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary), oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were".[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-1)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-brit-2) The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois-Ren%C3%A9_de_Chateaubriand) in 1819, following the French Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution).[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-3) The term, historically associated with right-wing politics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics), has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies that are universally regarded as conservative, because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus, conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues.
Edmund Burke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke), an Anglo-Irish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Irish) politician who served in the British House of Commons and opposed the French Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution), is credited as one of the founders of conservatism in Great Britain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_in_the_United_Kingdom).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-4) According to Quintin Hogg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintin_Hogg,_Baron_Hailsham_of_St_Marylebone), a former chairman of the British Conservative Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_%28UK%29), "Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself."[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-5)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#cite_note-5)


from, uh, wikipedia. Still, I think it gives a reasonably concise explaination of what it is, and the quote from Hogg at the end maybe gives an insight into the mindset.

[dodger]

Today the Tories have around 170,000 members with a rapidly rising average age of membership, about 75 in the Conservative Party, reflecting their inability to attract younger members.

Tory association members-- "mad, swivel-eyed loons". A leaked quote by Conservative Leaders. Content with that descriptive. Must be like herding cats. Grassroots activists are exceptionally loyal: they will grumble and moan about purity of policy and ideology, but their attachment is so great that they'll rarely turn their back on the party completely, no matter how overlooked they feel by its pronouncements.

Disengagement with politics is becoming widespread. Elections for parliament often command little more than a 50% turnout, often less. As for council elections, many wards command fewer votes than half that at best. EU a turnout of 34.3 in UK. Seems Tories have swallowed their Horse Meat Burgers with little complaint other than avoiding Tescos. Loyalty and resilience is as much a part of the activist's DNA as obsessiveness, no matter what their party colours. Right wing or left wing? Which wing do you need to fly with?

[SouthLondoner]

In an economic sense, its give a man a fish and you feed him for the day; teach him to fish and you feed him for life.

In terms of culturally, you have to ask the vast majority of the world; the most conservative places i have visited were islamic countries and India. Traditions served as social functions although subtly, the more money people have the more they throw away traditions and conservatism, hell most of the celebrities are "leftists", most people I have met who were proclaimed socialists, came from wealthy middle class families originally.
Just my two cents worth.

[Ace High]

Conservatism basically is ignorance. And I am not just saying that to call them names or because I hate them or whatever. I am saying this because of the experience I have had with conservatives and from every conservative I have ever known. They simply lack information about the world and how things really work. They are people who normally would never be political. But they see changes happening around them, and their fear of change (a natural fear in alot of people) causes them to develop this strange political view as a reaction to their surroundings becoming more and more unfamiliar.

Why do you think most conservatives are older people? They see what the new generations are doing as strange to them because they see us changing their environment and that confuses them because it is no longer the environment they love and are comfortable with. So they react by voting for policies which seek to preserve the current structure as much as humanly possible.

[Hegemonicretribution]

In response to the OP: The mindset is not fixed.

There is no one reason or factor linking all of those who subscribe to conservative ideals, nor is there for those that we might consider conservative.

I feel at best we can highlight a few reasons, some of which have already been illustrated.

Firstly, some people will chose conservatism as what they see to be a logical choice when it comes to selecting a political stance; they weigh up different approaches, and as far as they can see conservatism makes the most sense to them.

Secondly (although linked) they choose it as what they see to be the most logical political identity. They may lean either side of a central doctrine, but in a world of partisan politics they select an identity that best suits them for either political or social reasons.

Thirdly, they may take an inconsistent or illogical political stance (most would argue that this is always the case). They may have inconsistent or unsustainable reasons for being conservative, but adhere to central doctrines nonetheless.

Fourthly, they may choose an illogical political identity. Just as an identity may be chosen on what might be considered logical grounds, there are those who will adopt a conservative label simply to be contrary.

Fifthly....actually I have made my point. There is no specific mindset that would lend itself to conservatism. People are different. To paint them all the same is to do them (and us) a disservice)

[Revolutionary Daft]

I think smellincoffee and Hegemonicretribution really gave the best answers. Hegemonicretribution contribution could also be summarized as "why does anyone take any political stance ever?"


Conservatism basically is ignorance. And I am not just saying that to call them names or because I hate them or whatever. I am saying this because of the experience I have had with conservatives and from every conservative I have ever known.
I would be careful with this kind of generalization, because it's essentially the basis for many kinds of sexist and racist thought. Your personal experience doesn't necessarily reflect how conservatives really are, nor is it neutral. People are very biased in how they see the world, and will interpret things in a way that conforms to their worldview, which is why there are people who think all Muslims are evil, republicans thinking all socialists are selfish and greedy, socialists thinking all republicans are selfish and greedy etc. I think we should be very careful about generalizing, even when our own experiences seem to confirm our beliefs, because our experiences are colored by those beliefs themselves.

[MarxSchmarx]

Right wing ideology is successful among many people because it panders to their view of how a family should be run.

A family led decisively by an authoritarian paternal figure, where children are seen and not heard, is the default right-wing ideology. All else follows from this. If one looks at the language the fascists use what with all their appeals to "our children" this is transparent, and the "mainstream" right has succesfully taken a page from this book. That is why racial issues have such saliency because they speak to something as biologically basic as the immediate family.

The "harsh impartial market" of the economic right is but a mere extension of this basic paradigm. The "all knowing", "benevolent", yet "unforgiving" - dare we say paternal - free market will take care of everything.

This is why the right's gibberish has such currency among otherwise rational people. Until the left wakes up to this fact, it will forever be chanting its ponderous statistics and dreary numbers for the dwindling number of new recruits that will care to listen.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Right wing ideology is successful among many people because it panders to their view of how a family should be run.

A family led decisively by an authoritarian paternal figure, where children are seen and not heard, is the default right-wing ideology. All else follows from this. If one looks at the language the fascists use what with all their appeals to "our children" this is transparent, and the "mainstream" right has succesfully taken a page from this book. That is why racial issues have such saliency because they speak to something as biologically basic as the immediate family.

The "harsh impartial market" of the economic right is but a mere extension of this basic paradigm. The "all knowing", "benevolent", yet "unforgiving" - dare we say paternal - free market will take care of everything.

This is why the right's gibberish has such currency among otherwise rational people. Until the left wakes up to this fact, it will forever be chanting its ponderous statistics and dreary numbers for the dwindling number of new recruits that will care to listen.

Yes. I would, however, add to this intimate social construct theory and be a bit more general with this "Paternal" theory of yours (or at least see the question of social order from a different perspective).
I'd say the main reason for the continued existence and the main wellspring of political strength of the conservative bourgeoisie, is Authority in general. It is the submissiveness of the conservative workers. From 1st grade to 12th grade to the workplace, workers, especially those who have had a life of money issues and missed out on the social privileges which wealth creates, are constantly reminded how others just ask the questions and they answer questions how they should be answered.

If you add to the ignorant and downtrodden state of the mass of working people the fact that the wide consensus among the Rulers of society is that you live in a country where "anyone can make it" if you try hard enough (and have developed to become a perfect capitalist person who cares not for human relations and won't mind being turned down a million times before he indeed "makes it"), then you most likely will end up supporting cynical reactionary politicians who also care not about honest human relations, who also panic when it looks like social developments could threaten the last island of solace for the capitalist human, the bourgeois family.

We could make the issue of the survival of the conservative political class and reactionaries even simpler: Millions of people in the United States for instance, work for the totalitarian bourgeois state which demands the strictest discipline and lack of critical thought. In a society where the most indoctrinated and/or disciplined bourgeois cops and soldiers of the capitalist state have families which make up a large portion of the population that constitutes society, you cannot really expect anything but a strong political bias towards the capitalist order resulting from the institutional existence of the bourgeois state itself.

[International_Solidarity]

I understand fascists because i am good friends with one.

I used to have a friend that ended up becoming a Fascist. We stayed friends for a bit after that, but when I became Communist the friendship completely soured. I miss the fun times together, but I would never want to be friends with that Nazi scum again.
We actually were friends for a little while after I turned Communist and he was still Fascist though, so I kinda can relate to you here where most people probably can't. Lol weird. :)

[d3crypt]

I used to have a friend that ended up becoming a Fascist. We stayed friends for a bit after that, but when I became Communist the friendship completely soured. I miss the fun times together, but I would never want to be friends with that Nazi scum again.
We actually were friends for a little while after I turned Communist and he was still Fascist though, so I kinda can relate to you here where most people probably can't. Lol weird. :)

Yup

[Comrade Jacob]

There aren't many torries on here, but I'll give the answer: Greed, social-Darwinism, sociopathic tendencies, being a ***** and ignorance.

[Imperius]

Mostly ignorance, fear and self-interest but also a belief that human nature is fundamentally evil (as opposed to there being no such thing).

I think this is the key point. Conservatives place little faith in human nature. They believe that leftism suffers from a somewhat delusional understanding of human nature, and is overly wedded to notions of progress and rationality which grew out of the Enlightenment. As modern evolutionary psychology and rationality research is showing, humans are anything but the perfectible, rational, fair-minded, "PC" actors that the leftists would apparently have us become. There is even evidence to suggest that the difference between conservative and progressive/leftist minds is largely neurological, which means that all this moralistic rhetoric from both sides is a waste of breath.

An old-school conservative is one who believes that leftists are fighting an uphill and possibly futile battle against our inherent human nature. A conservative recognizes our flawed nature and opposes utopian revolutionary schemes because she believes they generally make things worse. A conservative is a pessimist in the short term, but accepts changes which prove themselves over longer time scales. A conservative believes in Darwinism in the realm of ideas, and believes that most new ideas fail the reality test. A conservative believes societies should be allowed to develop organically, rather than being engineered according to the theories of some intellectual vanguard.

Anyway, that's my take on the strongest variety of conservatism (which I generally adhere to, by the way). I would be interested to hear your revolutionary leftist critiques of this rather solid, if unsexy, worldview.

[RedBen]

what i love about the original question is that it implies conservatives have a mind in the first place.

[Comrade Jacob]

I think this is the key point. Leftism, it seems to me, suffers from a somewhat delusional understanding of human nature

Reactionary, even in your title.

[Vireya]

what i love about the original question is that it implies conservatives have a mind in the first place.

And communists do?

The only reason I'd ally with a commie over a capitalist conservative or a liberal would be because at the very least commies are socialist, albeit incredibly flawed ones.

[d3crypt]

And communists do?

The only reason I'd ally with a commie over a capitalist conservative or a liberal would be because at the very least commies are socialist, albeit incredibly flawed ones.

What type of socialist are not communists?

[Anarcho Jackson Jones]

They are under the delusion that the bosses and the workers have the same interests. So if the boss pays lower taxes and has a higher income, that's good for the working man. They simply don't grasp the inherent conflict of interests in a capitalist mode of production.

[Vireya]

Me and a lot of other socialists. Communism isn't the defining theory of Socialism. It is a type of socialism, socialism isn't a type of communism

[Rugged Collectivist]

Me and a lot of other socialists. Communism isn't the defining theory of Socialism. It is a type of socialism, socialism isn't a type of communism

As if those words actually meant anything.

[Vireya]

As if those words actually meant anything.

They do. Communism isn't the be all of socialism, to say so would be a blantant lie.

[d3crypt]

They do. Communism isn't the be all of socialism, to say so would be a blantant lie.

What socialist political idoeologies are there besides the tendancies of communism. There is marxism and anarchist types of communism. What else is there? Social Democracy is not socialism as it keeps the capitalist mode of production.

[d3crypt]

What type of socialist are you Vireya?

[Vireya]

What type of socialist are you Vireya?

I'm a market socialist with syndicalist tendencies.

BTW, I understand social democracy isn't socialism, I despise social democrats.

[Lilbthebasedgod]

Conservative here, ask me anything.

[Lilbthebasedgod]

Not really digging all of the ad hominem in this thread, however.

[Marxaveli]

I think this is the key point. Conservatives place little faith in human nature. They believe that leftism suffers from a somewhat delusional understanding of human nature, and is overly wedded to notions of progress and rationality which grew out of the Enlightenment. As modern evolutionary psychology and rationality research is showing, humans are anything but the perfectible, rational, fair-minded, "PC" actors that the leftists would apparently have us become. There is even evidence to suggest that the difference between conservative and progressive/leftist minds is largely neurological, which means that all this moralistic rhetoric from both sides is a waste of breath.

An old-school conservative is one who believes that leftists are fighting an uphill and possibly futile battle against our inherent human nature. A conservative recognizes our flawed nature and opposes utopian revolutionary schemes because she believes they generally make things worse. A conservative is a pessimist in the short term, but accepts changes which prove themselves over longer time scales. A conservative believes in Darwinism in the realm of ideas, and believes that most new ideas fail the reality test. A conservative believes societies should be allowed to develop organically, rather than being engineered according to the theories of some intellectual vanguard.

Anyway, that's my take on the strongest variety of conservatism (which I generally adhere to, by the way). I would be interested to hear your revolutionary leftist critiques of this rather solid, if unsexy, worldview.

Hi there,

I've seen the human nature argument made against revolutionary leftism time and again, but of all the arguments made against us, this one is the easiest to debunk in my opinion.

The first problem of the human nature argument is that conservatives setup a straw man. Leftists do not believe people are perfect, nor do we believe they can be. Nor do we believe that a communist society will be 100% perfect (we leave this type of thinking to our utopian socialist counter-parts, to whom Marx was extremely critical of). It is our view however, that a communist society will be A LOT better than what we have now.

The second problem of the human nature argument is that human nature is not a fixed, innate or static concept that is intrinsic to all human beings. The dynamics of evolution and history have proven otherwise. Human nature is a social construct - a reflection of the material conditions in which we live. We do not live in a mechanical, static world - we live in a dynamic and ever-changing world....and as the material conditions change, so to does human nature. At the simplest level, a hunter/gatherer has a very different conception of the world than a slave does, who in turn has a very different view of the world from a serf, and a worker under capitalism different from all of them still. Because of their different material circumstances, all of them behave and think differently. Marxism is the most stupendous, advanced (and honest) method for understanding human social relationships and their development in a dialectical way under capitalism. Our goal isn't to spew idealistic philosophy about how socialism should look, but to serve as an agency for social change and prevent a descent into barbarism. In short, leftists don't have a pessimistic view of humans, we have one of the current social order that causes people to betray their original nature.