"Left wingers tend to judge a policy's value based on the effect it will have on their entire community. For lefties, community ranges from everything from a local council area, to the entire country, and often to the whole world. Conversely, right wingers are much more likely to think first and foremost of the policy's impact on themselves and their immediate family."

Wedge politics, anyone? Perhaps we could rewrite this as follows: "Right wingers tend to judge a policy's value based on what they actually know, and the conclusions they can draw about what it will really achieve, based on their background and experience. Left wingers are much more likely to think first and foremost of the ideological stance of the policy source and how it fits in with their personal goals for large-scale disruption of the current system."

There, I fixed it for you.

You've 'hit the nail on the head' with article Victoria; got to the very crux of nearly every issue.

It's definitely a character thing and character depends a lot on personality, which is influenced by genetics. Right wingers are self interested but also materialistic - they see things and riches as being essential to their material and psychological well being and security. They also see their work in accumulating money and spending it on things as being 'good for the economy' and therefore that's the best thing they can do for others. I'd say this is true to a point but can't quite see where the line should be drawn.

Using myself as a 'laboratory' to analyse a leftie - I've always been compassionate for others, idealistic, loved justice, like a bit of personal hardship and know when enough is enough e.g. owning a small house, garden, bike, small car, modest superannuation. I feel insecure when I see greed and selfishness ruling and injustice at the inordinate power of the moneyed. I've always been like that and at 59, am unlikely to change. I also know that every one of us is a feeble insignificant being so I look to a higher power - higher motivation - to rule my life, not any earthly being(I call it God but I s'pose the Commies called him Lenin).

We can change our character, although it's limited by our genetics. Rightie - leftie switches can happen, such as when person's journey in the world takes them away from the values they inherited socially from their family (my father was a case in point). The opposite does happen too , usually when idealistic students become wealthy capitalists when they get good jobs.

The left are stupid:

http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2012/9/the-end-of-the-age-of-reform/page:printable

Yet another example of the Left's belief in their own moral and intellectual superiority while being blind to their own logical and moral deficits.

The Romney statement has been totally misinterpreted by the author. It was meant to show the hollowness of Obama's unattainable and outrageously expensive idealism which allows him to allocate the people's money for pointless exercises in impractical feelgood ideas vs Romney intention to simply make life better for families (eg get people back to work). The Obama administration has wasted a fortune on feelgood schemes which subsequently failed and cost the taxpayer money and jobs. (e.g Solyndra, electric cars etc) How is that humane? Its the people's money he is spending.

Its completely untrue that Conservatives don't care about the environment (another false Lefty belief). The reality is that they include Humans in it as a priority and don't see Humans as an inferior species who are ruining the environment like the Left do.

After all the talk about "treating people equally" the Left are the greatest haters on the planet, Conservatives to them, don't rate as equal and deserved to be punished.

The Left are the great wasters of tax monies under the guise of 'social justice' rendering the whole population poorer by their notion that the rich can pay for everyone.The Left are economically illiterate and we pay for it every time.

The author fails to understand that it is the prosperity brought about by profitable enterprises which leads to medical discoveries, improved care and funds social schemes. Yet, there is no chance that logic or information will alter her unshakeable belief in the superiority of her views.

Victoria gets some things right, however, the left aren't as egalitarian as she wants you to believe.
Why do they care more for people on the other side of the planet than the person down the road? There's plenty of homeless, mentally ill, and unemployed here, yet saving people 10,000kms away seems to be more important. Furthermore, I have great concerns that altruism is the motivating factor in this 'egalitarianism.' Having once been a lefty and having spent 9 years in the Academe, I found these 'egalitarians' to be persuaded more by reactive motives than genuine concern. It seemed to be little more than a 'point scoring' opportunity over the Liberals or the business community. Their personal lives were far from egalitarian, usually so full of self-importance, snobbishness, and highly intolerant of alternative viewpoints. Additionally, their 'altruism' was often palmed onto the state, thus depersonalizing their 'egalitarianism.'
It is also interesting to note that the genuine egalitarians often come from the church, a group much despised by the left. It is the Christian missionaries who go around feeding and clothing the homeless late at night, whereas the academic and intellectual left are nowhere to be seen.

I moved to the right because I found the hypocrisy of the left unbearable. The right are far more honest in their views.

That all seemed self serving and overly simplistic. I guess that its difficult to consider broad political positions without resorting to broad stereotypes however the author is either lacking in understanding of what motivates a lot of those nominally on the "right" or is deliberately misrepresenting both sides.

Good people with compassion and a car for the wellbeing of society exist on both the left and right of politics as do the selfish hate filled bigots.

As someone on the right of politics I have the perception that those on the left are more inclined to do compassion (or dismissal ) for people based on ideological groupings than on the reality of their lives than those on the left. The social or human cost of policies seem to matter little if those on the downside ar not part of some group deemed worthy of care. I'm also aware that we all sit on a continium rather than at some fixed point.

I'm more than tired of politicians on both sides of politics valuing other peoples life choices and priorities ahead of mine when it comes to deciding what happens with my income.

A basic test for those who think they hold some sort of moral high ground on this. Of those who advocate for higher taxes how many routinely send some extra off to the tax department even if you don't think you can afford to do so? Not to a favorite charity but to the tax department. If you don't do that then you are making a similar choice to those who want to maintain control of their income, you just dress it up in a pretense.

R0bert