PatrickRay.Net

Every so often I go browsing through various websites looking for interesting reads. Earlier today I came across this from Jay Dixit who is a Harvard Hack, Canada-Lover and writer for Psychology Today (enough said). As soon as I read the title I knew I was in for a treat. “The Ideological Animal”, how cute. Jay tried to be witty. Nevertheless, let me preface this writing briefly.

First off, I strongly dislike politics and politicians. I keep up to date on everything that goes on in the world of politics which only fuels my distaste. Personally I find conservatives and liberals to be mostly inept and grossly retarded and the people that follow their political counterpart’s every move to be mentally deficit of any actual, reasoned thinking. I’ve grown to hate both sides, but I have to admit that liberals are the most fun. They’re the most entertaining at parties and their failed logic is the easiest to make fun of. Anyone that forms their opinions based on what some actor said at the 74^th Annual Retard Actor Awards, whose opinion was based on an article they read in a paper somewhere clearly appreciates being talked down to. You call conservatives blind for…blindly following their party yet you do the same thing. And both sides fail to realize that sticking to your guns no matter what makes you the same even if the issues are different. You claim that your party is one of kindness and equal acceptance of everyone yet you yourself make fun of the other side on a national scale. That’s not acceptance. In fact, it’s not even the same tolerance that you preach that you supposedly have.

That said I’ll go back to “The Ideological Animal”. This is the first article from “Psychology Today” that I’ve read in a while and it’s the first article that I’ve read from this magazine that I walked away from thinking that it’s more fit to be an op-ed piece in The New York Times than an article in a “respected” professional publication. Psychologists make me laugh. People that routinely go to psychologists make me laugh. As someone with a degree in a similar field, I’m completely confident in stating that psychologists, for the most part, are complete hacks. Jay’s article is, in fact, interesting. There are fact-based points presented but the deductions from those facts are comical. The article talks about how evidence shows that liberals and conservatives are wired differently. I didn’t need a study to tell me that. Anyway, once you strip away his non-technical psycho-speak his ultimate political point is that conservatives make their decisions based on fear which means that somehow they must be using fear to manipulate the masses. This was shown by people who turned to conservatism after 9/11. Buildings went boom so people moved towards the party that fostered and encouraged their fear of death.

I disagree with Jay’s reasoning and I present a counter reasoning, a reasoning that is vastly superior to a Yale Degree (-1) because it’s based on common sense (+1) and is not politically motivated (+1). I believe those people moved to conservatism because they decided it was the belief structure that stood the higher chance of keeping them safe. Let’s look at the proposal that conservatives focus on fear for much the same reason as liberals focus on the arts, because it’s what’s they are wired to focus on. The whole premise of the article is that our genetics predispose us to like certain things. Liberals are more likely to read books and listen to jazz music. Conservatives are more likely to be well-organized, listen to talk radio and know how to slaughter wave after wave of blood thirsty zombies. It’s not that conservatives set out to use fear as a manipulation tool, it’s that they are better at recognizing danger. Danger is something that should evoke the proper amount of fear as a counter-balance as fear is a survival instinct. Conservatives are screaming, “WATCH OUT!” in much the same way that a liberal would try to interpret abstract art to the inartistic. The difference is that while abstract art will rot my brain, it probably won’t kill me. A car rocketing down the road while I’m dancing in the streets probably will. Liberals are too busy drinking a Starbucks Double Chocolaty Chip Frappuccino Blended Crème rocking to Miles Davis on their IPod’s while reading to notice what’s going on around them. I propose that conservatism, in all of it’s equally screwed up form, is what has allowed rabid liberalism to multiply like a pair of rabbits trapped in a cage. It keeps bailing people out, even when it knows better. That sounds pretty compassionate to me. (Please note that I hate compassion as it interferes with my free time)

What I’ve decided to do is make a test to help you determine how strong your ability to detect danger is. This is a 100% scientific test and all you need to do is decide which picture out of each pair reflects the person, place or thing that is the most dangerous. Don’t worry, it won’t take long. There are only 5 sets of pictures. Write down your answers and I’ll tell you how you did when you’re done.

SET 1

                   

1                                                          2

SET 2

                   

1                                                          2

SET 3

                    

1                                                           2

SET 4

                   

1                                                          2
SET 5

                    

1                                                           2

So how did you do? Click Read More to find out the correct answers and see how you did overall.

SET 1

                   
1                                                          2

#2. #1 looks menacing at first, but look at his clothing and the background. This gentleman is clearly a hunter, most likely preparing to field dress game. On the other hand, look at the correct answer choice, #2. #2 is clearly a gangsta wanna be. There’s no need to wave a knife around in the city. I’m not sure if he’s on the street or on the top deck of a parking structure, but either way he’s clearly waiting for an unassuming victim to walk by the project you can see in the background.

SET 2

                   

1                                                          2

#1. The average person would choose Charles Manson. After all, he claims to have killed 35 people. However, mosquitoes are responsible for an estimated 2-3 million deaths worldwide EVERY YEAR! That makes mosquitoes 85714x (times) more dangerous than even the most superior serial killers. I can see all of you hippies stocking up on “animal tested” bug spray already.

SET 3

                    

1                                                           2

#2 On the left we have a tattoo from a *La Raza gang member. On the right we have a Hobo Spider.  While tattoo’s themselves can’t hurt you, this isn’t the reason why #1 isn’t the right answer. The Hobo Spider’s venom is toxic and can cause memory loss and blindness. La Raza gang members typically just jump around yelling things in Spanish while making false threats. La Raza gang members are merely illegal immigrants showing us all the good they can contribute to society.

*La Raza is a Chicago-based gang which should already tell you that they don’t pose much of a threat.

SET 4

                   

1                                                          2

#1 Shocking, isn’t it?

Q: What do these two pictures have in common?

A: They both make me sleepy.

Q: How many people did cougars kill from 1986-1998?

A: 2

Q: How many children did the EZ Sales Mini-Hammock kill in roughly the same time period (1984-1995)?

A: 12

That’s right. EZ’s Mini-Hammock is 6x (times) more dangerous than a cougar. This evil toy violently hung 12 innocent children in it’s noose. It didn’t care that they were just trying to take a nap outside, in fact it used this to it’s advantage by stalking children and manipulating their parents into believing that it was nothing more than a harmless toy.  Of course, if the hammock hadn’t taken these kids out I wonder if mosquito/hobo spider double teams would have anyway?

SET 5

                    

1                                                            2

#1 Most people would pick the gun. Most people are unobservant morons. Energy drinks like Monster have maliciously ended the lives of roughly 80 people while airsoft guns have killed roughly zero (0) people. You can buy Energy drinks almost anywhere, including gas stations and grocery stores. What’s worse is that you can buy one without an ID as there is no age limit to purchase and consume these deadly beverages. There are stories all over the news about police departments working to rid our streets of dangerous Airsoft guns (mainly because inept police officers can’t stop shooting kids who are merely playing in their neighborhoods). I want to know why there isn’t more Monster Energy Drink Legislation on the books to be reviewed? Come on people! Energy drinks are infinitely x (times) more dangerous! INFINITELY!!! That’s a HUGE number. Yeah, pop the top on another one of those.

 So how aware were you? This was a pretty easy test and it’s time to take a look at how you did.

0 Correct: Way to go, you’re officially French. And if you’re really from France then wow, I’m sorry to hear that. I’m amazed you can find a way to function in modern society.

1 Correct: Put the bong down. Stop playing so many video games. I recommend spending more time in the real world. However, proceed cautiously. Remember not to step out in front of traffic.

2 Correct: Awe, that’s sweet. Nice try! I know college is/was an exciting time but trust me, most of your professors are idiots. In fact, most all professors are idiots. I recommend learning to question what you hear, and investigate other sides of the equation.

3 Correct: Have no fear, there is hope for you yet. I know it sucks to get handed a “C” but there’s a silver lining in everything. Yours is that your IQ is above average. You’ve been the victim of what happens when your disorganized environment is trying to overrule your organized genetics.

4 Correct: You’re on the verge of greatness. On one hand you’re smart enough to avoid places you shouldn’t go and people you shouldn’t associate with. On the other hand you’re probably not where you need to be in order to survive that aforementioned zombie attack.

5 Correct: What can I say, I don’t have to tell you anything to try and make you feel better about yourself. The fact of the matter is that your equipped to survive pretty much anything.

So that’s that.

10 Comments

Comments RSS

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website