conservatism asian aversion to war

We speculate that the association of gray matter volume of the amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex with political attitudes that we observed may reflect emotional and cognitive traits of individuals that influence their inclination to certain political orientations. For example, our findings are consistent with the proposal that political orientation is associated with psychological processes for managing fear and uncertainty. The amygdala has many functions, including fear processing. Individuals with a large amygdala are more sensitive to fear, which, taken together with our findings, might suggest the testable hypothesis that individuals with larger
amygdala are more inclined to integrate conservative views into their belief system…. Similarly, it is striking that conservatives are more sensitive to disgust, and the insula is involved in the feeling of disgust. On the other hand, our finding of an association between anterior cingulate cortex volume and political attitudes may be linked with tolerance to uncertainty. One of the functions of the anterior cingulate cortex is to monitor uncertainty and conflicts. Thus, it is conceivable that individuals with a larger ACC have a higher capacity to tolerate uncertainty and conflicts, allowing them to accept more liberal views. Such speculations provide a basis for theorizing about the psychological constructs (and their neural substrates) underlying political attitudes. However, it should be noted that every brain region, including those identified here, invariably participates in multiple psychological processes. It is therefore not possible to unambiguously infer from involvement of a particular brain area that a particular psychological process must be involved.

 

Social conservatism is one of the more deep set of the 'Asian values' uncovered in this study. It extends its hold far beyond the political conservatives who championed the overt 'Asian values' discourse. Social conservatism reaches deep into the ranks of people who appear to the Western eye to be social and political innovators: sometimes taking the form of ethical conservatism often as concern for strong, cohesive families. It is well to remember that it is not just Lee Kuan Yew and Dr Mahathir who champion strong families, but also the secular feminists of Thailand. Furthermore,despite decades of Westernisation, modernization widespread promiscuity, and the ready availability of contraceptives and abortion, even Japanese society remains steadfast in the value it places on family cohesion and socially ascribed gender roles. But despite the breadth of the appeal of social conservatism, it seems unlikely that the ethical challenges and the social atomism that seem to be the inevitable companions of capitalism and modernity.

One of the odder aspects of present-day politics is the assumption that if you are antiwar you are on the left, and if you are conservative you are “pro-war.” Like labelling conservative states red and liberal states blue, this is an inversion of historical practice.
The opposition to America’s entry into both World Wars was largely led by conservatives. Senator Robert A. Taft, the standard-bearer of postwar conservatism, opposed war unless the United States itself was attacked. Even Bismarck, after he had fought and won the three wars he needed to unify Germany, was staunchly antiwar. He once described preventive war, like the one America is being pressured to wage on Iran, as “committing suicide for fear of being killed.”
Conservatives’ detestation of war has no “touchy-feely” origins. It springs from conservatism’s roots, its most fundamental beliefs and objectives. Conservatism seeks above all social and cultural continuity, and nothing endangers that more than war.