Thank you for your commentary, and for finding Subversify. We have a lot here on an ongoing basis which you’ll find worth bookmarking the site!

As to my article, I was pretty clear that this wasn’t a representative sample, a statistical research-piece, nor did I state that this was anything other than “Conversations with Conservatives”. I believe I was also pretty careful to point out that any conclusions were based on the people with whom I spoke – not that they were representative of anyone but themselves.

The people who self-identify as right-conservative also identify as fundamentalist Christians in such significant numbers (the stats are easily available on this; I didn’t bother to post them) as to make both groups almost one and the same. In his book “Republican Gomorrah”, Blumenthal cites most of these stats, and they are sufficiently up-to-date enough as to be reliable.

The piece above was intended to do two things – first, it was to give a ‘window’ to those of us who are liberal/progressive regarding some of the beliefs and primary motivations of a group we’ve all accepted as existing, and existing in sufficient numbers to be a real motive-force in American politics; secondly, it was intended to give a few of those people a voice and a chance to make themselves heard.

What I learned was that, as other researchers have taken the time to prove exhaustively, they really are an insular group, with little motivation or desire to speak to those of us who are ‘on the other side’.

Did 12% of California control the polls?

I’ll say this – it’s unscientific; but reasoned – it’s a quote by Margaret Mead: “A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Those things are worth remembering – these people have influence far beyond their numbers – and, depending on which side of the argument you’re on, that’s either a great thing or a great danger to American democracy.

Thanks again for reading!

-”Astra”

Interesting survey – I can’t help but point out that all you really know from this survey is what these seven people think. Which I gather you understand. You did not draw any conclusions, not overtly. However, you have taken these seven people, labeled them as Far Right Religious Conservatives, commented on the insular nature of conservatives in general and far right ones in particular, and basically put out there that somewhere between 10 and 13% of the population, represented by 2 millionths of one percent of that group, are the cause of the polarization in America. Really?

That’s like taking one person from Woodstock, asking them some questions, and reporting “This is what hippies think.” Except one person out of the half million people that were at Woodstock is two orders of magnitude larger a statistical sampling, and so, the Woodstock Hippy Survey could be argued as more representative.

So, if it were my survey, I could take the new understanding of what “hippies” think and generalize to all youth in America. Depending who I talked to, I could arrive at the conclusion that all youth in America were free loving dope fiends in the 60s, or that Abbie Hoffman was their spokesperson. Which, simply, was not the case. I’m not sure the question of “What to do about the youth in America?” would be served by this survey.

And I guess I have the same concerns about yours. I’m not sure the question of “What to do about the polarization in America?” is served by your survey. Again, I know that you specifically did not draw conclusions – but you are labeling a group and calling them responsible. This misses the point, really.

For example, I know that Religion has been the focus of a lot of ire regarding the same sex marriage setbacks thus far this and last year. Particularly, the Catholic Church is blamed for defeating these measures. Really? Catholics comprise something around 25% of the total self-identified christian population in this country, and less than half of these Catholics actually practice their religion (measured as attending mass, taking the sacraments, paying attention to church teaching like don’t use contraception, etc.) So, 12% of the population in California controlled the polls there? No. Simply, something else is going on there. Yes, I have also heard about the money they have given in support of these campaigns. Like in one state $50,000. Never mind that several millions of dollars were spent in total and that 50k is not a significant percentage of those millions. My point is that one can’t lay the defeat of same-sex marriage in 30 states at the feet of far right religious conservatives. There are not enough of them to accomplish that.

Perhaps your next survey could attempt to understand what is actually happening with this polarization in America and look beyond Far Right Religious Conservatives. There simply are not enough of them to have created this polarization.

This is probably the most-telling comment about the ‘sweep’ of the piece – and I don’t believe it’s far off the mark.

When doing the research, it was clear that the far Right (the initial subject of the piece) were very reticent to comment.

I imagine I’d get a better response from moderates.

–Will (“Astra”)

1. I don’t think thoughs are fully formed around ideals, some people simply queue up behind anything that has “God” in the sentance. If God ostensibly okayed it, then it must be right. Nevermind God supposedly gave people free will and tells everyone to look within for direction.

2. I truly think Christians who are not as rabid are afraid of being misunderstood and grouped in with their excentric kinfolk. There are many people who believe in the Judeo-Christian tenants who are also quite reasonable, however it is a truth that people I communicate with often find themselves being asked questions they know nothing about, not being of the rabid sort themselves.

3. I think we may be experiencing a period where people do not know what to think, do and say anymore. I have a feeling that some of the more reasonable people who also call themselves conservative are trying to work out how a bunch of madmen and women got to the top of the party.

Some food for thought.

As I mentioned to another commenter, yes, these were real responses to a real questionnaire and yes, those were – profanity and all – the real answers I received. As mentioned to another respondent, the liberal (no pun intended) use of “(sic)” was because I didn’t censor, correct, or change any answers – these were as I received them.

The biggest problem is finding people who’ll respond to a questionnaire about their beliefs. I didn’t state anywhere in the article that this was a scientific survey, or that I had what I felt was anywhere near a representative group – that’s the reason why I entitled the article as I did, rather than trying to write a research-paper – there simply weren’t the respondents to give any sort of balanced view.

That said, I really fear that this is the sort of thing we’re seeing – while your friends might be Conservative, they’re not making themselves heard – and that’s the problem, plus the reason so many people here in America are so damn scared – The Tancredos, Limbaughs and Palins of America are the ones speaking for America’s Conservatives.

I don’t expect a moderate Conservative would read this and have anything but disdain; if you query them a little further, though, the real reason would not be that they disagree – but that their viewpoint wasn’t present.

To that end, I think it would be good to follow this with a ‘part 2′, at that point when I could get enough moderates to actually come out of the woodwork to complete a questionnaire.

Truly, I thank you for your input. I stand by the article in its entirety; the method by which I collected the data – and if read in the proper light, it exposes the insular nature of the far Right just as much as any viewpoint.

Again; thanks for reading!

-Will (“Astra”)