Arthur Brooks is one of them economists who writes in plainspeak fer us'uns in the hinterlands.

This professor of Econ from Syracuse U wrote Gross National Happiness.

Fergit the double shelf of self-help "happiness" volumes over at the local bookery.

Prof. Brooks has a whole different take: he yaks about the "politics of happiness."

Cut and pasted from the Economist Magazine:

"In 2004 Americans who called themselves “conservative” or “very conservative” were nearly twice as likely to tell pollsters they were “very happy” as those who considered themselves “liberal” or “very liberal” (44% versus 25%). American conservatives have been consistently happier than liberals for at least 35 years.

"This is not because they are richer; they are not. Mr Brooks thinks three factors are important. Conservatives are twice as likely as liberals to be married and twice as likely to attend church every week. Married, religious people are more likely than secular singles to be happy. They are also more likely to have children, which makes Mr Brooks confident that the next generation will be at least as happy as the current one.

"When religious and political differences are combined, the results are striking. Secular liberals are as likely to say they are “not too happy” as to say they are very happy (22% to 22%). Religious conservatives are ten times more likely to report being very happy than not too happy (50% to 5%). Religious liberals are about as happy as secular conservatives.

"Why should this be so? Mr Brooks proposes that whatever their respective merits, the conservative world view is more conducive to happiness than the liberal one (in the American sense of both words). (Doan holler at me lib-folks-- I din't say it--I'se jes' reportin' )

"American conservatives tend to believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can succeed. This makes them more optimistic than liberals, more likely to feel in control of their lives and therefore happier.

(An' Aunty would say they's a heap more fun, have more humor--why? cause the have hope)

"American liberals, at their most pessimistic, stress the injustice of the economic system, the crushing impersonal forces that keep the little guy down and what David Mamet, a playwright, recently summed up as the belief that “everything is always wrong”.

Emphasising victimhood was noble during the 1950s and 1960s, says Mr Brooks. By overturning Jim Crow laws, liberals gave the victims of foul injustice greater control over their lives.

"But in as much as the American left is now a coalition of groups that define themselves as the victims of social and economic forces, and in as much as its leaders encourage people to feel helpless and aggrieved, he thinks they make America a glummer place."

To all my liberal blog-buddies: Lighten up and c'mon over!


boneman said...

defeat stinks.
Too bad junior doesn't realize that and get us out'a some other country's business.

On the other hand, other factor should also be taken into factor, you see, any poll based on percentage is slanted toward where ever one wants to slant it.
Point in example....Take the same poll of "happiness" in a country where religious freedom is not tolerated.... oh, maybe he did, eh?

(No.... just kiddin')

Like say deep China....

Happiness is a state of mind, gal. We think we're happy then we are happy.
Hey, what then of me, a conservative/liberal who was true to two wives, also republicans (a lil less liberal, though) who divorced me (and for no good reason that wasn't selfishly concieved).... what happiness may I say I have a part of?

The heck with them.

Defeat is also what the Republicans screamed at all of us that went to Viet Nam after we came back. What? No matter what we do, no matter the outcome, y'all are going to squawk at us for doing the wrong thing.

Is there any way to make you happy?

boneman said...

By the way, thanx for the mememe....it actually spawned a second (and third in some places) meme. I noticed not everyone worked at putting links in, but, hey. It was a challenge, and now, thanx to you, I can put links into my stuff.

Then again, it does get the computer greasy when I put too many links in....

..................... said...

well, if going to church would make me happier, i would..
however, the fit itches .. so, i don't go and
i'm content as is.

so, liberals are whiners and conservatives see the world through pink shades .. ;)
what scares me is not the varying degrees of differences of happiness.

what scares me is extreme happiness ..
you know, those folks who are so happy they think the reason for their happiness should be imposed on everybody.
and if you don't agree on the method of becoming happy you are outrightly wrong..

..and yes, i did go and read the whole article ..
and googled him and found out he apparently does diligent research.

Aunty Belle said...


I hear that--and agree wif' a good measure of it. I ain't the rosy glasses type meself.

An' I din't mean this as a plug fer gettin' to church (although it's a good plan).

What struck Aunty is that folks who "conserve" the accumulated wisdom of human experience and apply it to new situations of modern life--seems these is folks who have hope. They believe in a given-ness of reality and work within that framework.

Example: Hill-Billary thinks "it takes a village" but it doan. The reverse is true. "It takes a family to make a village in the first place."

Conservatives doan try to change human nature or humman history by pretending that a "village" (gubmint) can do what a family does.

They doan try to reinvent the cosmos to fit their ideas of "how things should be."

I reckon the disappointment comes for liberals who imagine that if the "right" society or "right" political environment or "right"
education could be imposed then everyone would be happy, life would be fair and we'd all jes' git along fine an' there'd be no mo war.

Conservatives know that ain't so, will never be so. People doan all work at the same pace or intensity or commitment to the whole of society --ya' cannot insure an "equality of outcome" for 300 million US citizens or 6 billion citizens of the UN Global Government.

Socialism and Communism and various universalist forms of human organization simply cannot work. But libs keep on tryin'. They keep on failing, an keep on being mad as heck about it. They divert energy into it--more energy (often) than into family life--then wonder why they is so alienated.

I feel sorry for the libs. I truly does.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
boneman said...

OK, well, that's what I get for dancing between a stupid encyclopedia and a blog comment box.
And I had a vague memory of you and K9 not being big on it.

Paul Wolfowitz, South Africa, Jimmy Carter, (portions of) WKRP in Cinncinatti and Scrubs (tv shows) Condoleeza Rice.
Oh, and Hillary Clinton.

Name people who have used the phrase, "it takes a village to raise a child,"
(Did you notice the second entry there? I put it promenantly for you to see it is an African proverb...
many people used it and for longer than Mrs. Clinton has been alive.)
(actually, Paul Wolfowitz caught me and that's why he got top billing....)
That's some of what's at wikipedia, and my apologies for bringing it here.... but, dang, even doing google searches will drag your heiny through wiki....
So, let's see if I can help....
Conservatives doan try to change human nature (unless it upsets their sensitivities) or humman history by pretending that a "village" (gubmint) can do what a family does. (again, unless it upsets their sensitivities, and if it does there's a mad dash scramble to shut the gates! Close the doors! Be the SAME! Be the SAME! MAKE NEW LAWS! GET OLD LAWS CHANGED! BE THE SAME! BE THE SAME!
You do not show respect, hey, I can't help that. I have good reason to call him junior, that's for sure. I did my duty. Not tuck under daddies big ol wing and hide. (Heck, at least guys that slipped away to Canada had the guts to act on their convictions.)
And then later send 4000 of this nation's children to their death and keep them ON HIS ORDER! to stay past when they should have come home, some should have already been discharged, oh YEAH! i have it against junior....

Hillary must have struck you the same way for some reason, though. Help that many folks to their death, did she?
Now, you can go back, but you'll see where he is Sen. John McCain, or, John McCain or McCain.
I don't like the man. He has turned from truth, and that just doesn't thrill me.
Why don't I take the right wing, conservative method of labeling him, say, CAIN.
I really did like who it was that said "republicants" but I don't use the term m'self....
Y'know why?

(don't get mad)
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

You think you know who originated that, don't you? Don't look. Say.

"Do" is the verb form....respect can be used as a verb, respect others as you would have them respect you....that does sound right, doesn't it?
I am not changing anything to match my wants, but, golly gal, if you have no respect for others why would anyone respect you?
Unless something is wrong in your life?
If that's it, say and I won't bother you a bit. I ain't here as a "devil's advocate" because I don't have any respect for the satan vision.
It seems more to me that mankind might just be the devil.
We sure don't cut any slack when we do bad things.
They doan try to reinvent the cosmos to fit their ideas of "how things should be."
yeah as long as it conforms to what you and yours have deemed what the cosmos is.

Coservatives know there's going to be ongoing wars.... what? forever?

-ya' cannot insure an "equality of outcome" for 300 million US citizens or 6 billion citizens of the UN Global Government.

that is the Republican agenda, 300 Billion.
That is also the Catholic agenda, six billion.
It is EXACTLY their agenda.
What? you want another connection?
China...that would be a communist state, yes? Socialist in some form or other?
In a pig's eye they are. It isn't either communism OR socialism, I don't care what word they choose to use. It's a tyranny. It's a flat out tyranny that it's own people don't want!
And who kowtows to them? (When will junior be going there? Is his dad going with him or meeting him there?)
The idea of socialism isn't popular, that's for sure. Especially among the rich and well to do, eh?
That's a mix of, I'm sure, liberals and conservatives, though that isn't actually a good point of reference anymore. Are you talking about the politicians or the party or the ideals or the historicals? All different, some vague similarities, but through-out the history of the United States....( There's a good name! Why have Republican party heads been bending that around to be "Americans" instead? That seems to be some of the universalism you were condemning just a moment ago. And then y'all want to spend more money building a "super wall"....
Has this whole nation gone nuts?
Butters can get out of his room anytime,
the wall will not stop folks from coming.)....political ideals have evloved one from the other, mutated, evolved again....
And it's not like the conservative party wants to do anything about illegal immigrants other than a continuation of status quo. What? Too easy, you say? Well, let's get those water stations out of the desert and we'll be able to stop a few hundred more using the heat of the sun and the lack of water. Build a twentyfive foot wall of steel 700 miles long between Mexico and the USA (when we can't even build one for New Orleans or Alabama to keep the waters out)

We need more water stations in the desert, not less and we should be providing ambulatory help to those who get stuck out there.)
But, I digress. The Roman Catholic Church is a non profit venture, the folks who work within the "government" of the Vatican are not paid as we are paid, by the hour or by the job....all their "incomes" go into a "pot" And money is given as needed. And that's called communism.
Is it Sister Theresa? Mother Thresa?
Not knowing which, but having the highest regard and respect for what she did, I shall call her Good Sister, because that is what she exemplified. Good.

Good Sister used to complain openly about states' lack of caring for their own poor.
Good Sister probably ended up where she was because of that quick fire, calmly delivered verbal thrusts to some mighty powerful men. But minded not at all and went about the work she felt was most important. Helping those who had nothing.
You seem against that thinking, Aunty, being as that is the description of socialism.
So, you deny the church, but hide behind its precepts when it suits you? Is that so very Christian?
(There. It's in the form of a question and not a bold statement, but, somehow, and maybe you don't know this....
the your last answer will be the good answer.
And it won't be to me or anybody else here.)
OK, that was way too long, but, it just struck me I know what's wrong....
It's an election year, and for all the world, I never did understand why that would change people so from friends to enemies, neighbors into fence building maniacs.

You just say, gal, and I'll slip off till, say,
Jan. 23 McCain,
Jan.27 Obama,
I'll meet you with some wine on the 30th and we'll both cry, Clinton.
Y'know, I don't remember if I told you I found where we need to work on first and foremost to start a conversation to the Bible....

An' I din't mean this as a plug fer gettin' to church (although it's a good plan).

That would be the great commission, yes? Last paragraph in Matthew is the first I saw it....

I think that's gonna be a tough one, eh?

boneman said...

I'll tell you what, there are like a b'zillion of these exact kinds of messages all over the place ( I know...I've been all over the place exploring today. Japan, places I don't even know because i have monolingual knowledge (I can count in other languages...)
but those spam thimgs can't be good if they're so far and plentiful....

Lady Prism said...

Hello Aunty! Interesting post..dropped by with a virtual "mango shake" ( it has yogurt) just for you...

Hope everything is well and fine with you...I'm going to build a beach house Aunty...I'm sure going to make sure it has a nice wrap around porch..I'll think of you whenever I sit there.

Take care:>

Aunty Belle said...

ya dump all yore frustrations in one lumpy pile-up...but it ain't makin' a whole lot of sense, Sugar.

First thing is it ain't about yore polly-tician or mine. So leave all that yak about Bush or Clinton or Nobama.

In three sentences maxium, deal with Professor Brooks contention that liberals are without hope, thus unhappy folks.

moi said...

Well: I can do that in one sentence, Aunty: They are without hope, because hope is a habit of the self and liberals sublimate the responsibilities of the self and give them over to outside forces.

The liberal argument, by and large, is that the outside world informs the personal. The conservative belief, by and large, is that the personal informs the outside world. It's the simple glass half full/half empty tenet. Hope is only available to those who see the glass not only as half full, but that their actions and theirs alone is what affects their well being.

Happiness is not an elusive, fairy land state of being. Happiness is something you make a number one goal for your life and then go about achieving it through purposeful action, not wishful thinking, and you certainly don't place it in the hands of others.

boneman said...

In three sentences maxium, deal with Professor Brooks contention that liberals are without hope, thus unhappy folks.

Brook's contention of "liberals being without hope" is a narrow minded, moronic statement of stupidity, probably garnered from religion and its infliction upon mankind. Not everyone who sets the goal of happiness reaches that goal, and the reasons are far more complicated tan some jackass saying he has the answer....I mean, girl, they are still trying to find a unified field teory in science, too, but, they ain't likely ever going to get it.
Because it encompasses geography, cultural situations, family situations, education (did you never hear about the man who starved to death outside of town because he didn't know he was allowed in town????) society as a whole, the societal arena one is in, and a host of a million other considerations.

3 sentences.

And, by the way, what I wrote last night *(this morning, actually, finished at 0300 hrs) I wrote each and every word, I also did my own spell checking, added the lil things and edited it....yeah. It may seem riough, but, there were several points made that all came from your comment.

And you do a 'cut and paste' on me?
I'm amazed.
Astounded even. What modern thinking. What character.

I will endevor to read it all, and, just for you, even correct it....
with pictures ....)

Aunty Belle said...

Thanks MOI--the responsibility thang--that is the summation of it!

Boney, cut and paste from good sources is better'n Wiki-pee

boneman said...

who you think you're fooling, gal.
When I reference your material, you want to guess where it sends me?

I'm still reading it, mostly historical tripe....
All facts and then tie in an opinion? That's rich. No credibility, but, rich. Didn't figure you to be one to tie into with John Birch and their gang of hooligans, either.

But, at the risk of you dumping on me again, let me remind you that you are still doing that nasty lil number you do.

With your tail slung up in the air, you turn and walk out without answering up to anything.


Communism/socialism is the Roman Catholic Church's brand of political agenda.

You say your brand of government is such that "human natuire" is given the road
Unless it's something you don't like
Homosexuality to begin with, is going to be your downfall because it is exactly that....human nature, and there's nothing to stop it, though there are fifteen senators and a few more congressmen (all but three Republicans) that feel that it is wise to make the practice illegal altogther.

So? What's new there? The Republican government has, for the most part, decided we the people of the United States of America don't need to know what's going on...and sincerely, I wish you would make your points without lying...your statement of how "conservatives want to keep an eye on government" sheer hogwash.

Well, so much more reading to do.

While you out finding all the cut and paste, did you happen top find anything on humanity, charity, or just plain learning some basic tenents of respect and manners?

Aunty Belle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Boney, take a deep breath. Exhale now. Again, deeee--eeep breath.

Looky, think with yore brain, not wif yore ire.

If youse finding anything Aunty cuts and pastes at Wikipee--it is the other way round. The Wiki contributor found stuff at the original source and added it to the wiki entry.

Youse hilarious--youse ALL about *yore* opinion, but ya object when Aunty quotes facts and opinion of folks far more deserving of having their opinions heard than you or me??

Part of the reason ya git so riled up is ya doan read clearly or carefully. I did not say my brand of gubmint is: human nature given the road--whatever that phrase means.

As fer homosexuality, it is not natural, it is a developmental misstep, a symptom of a deeper disconnect that happened in early childhood. This post is not-- and will not be-- about homosexuality. But to state that homosexuality is unnatural and unhealthy is not to be read as a rejection of homosexual persons or disrespect towards them. One's fundamental personhood is not defined in a particular sexual act.

I said that NO gubmint that ignores the realities of the natural order can be a good gubmint. That is why socialism fails.

Kindygarten lesson:


All of the above is based on the idea that man can be perfected. Ya' might have to kill most of them to "perfect" them, but all of the above ideologies dream of some "perfect" man in a "perfect" society and they will kill ya to prove their dream is possible.

It cain't be done. Man is already as perfect as he will be minus the grace of God. The techno -toys might change, but the nature of man is the same as it was when fire was discovered.

The best system of gubmint is the LEAST system, the most free and self-directed system.

Socialism and communism and all others above listed abhor yore freedom, they enslave ya with the chains of so-called health care or "welfare" or "grants" or "equal opportunity." Socialists destroy the family, the local associations --all mediating institutions so that you MUST depend on the State as God.

Then when youse so addicted to all the goodies and the state bully to do yore sorry biddin', then, why look around--then youse unable to be self responsible, unable to even think wif'out the aid of brainwashing cheat sheets. Youse a socialism addict by then. Ya cain't git off the horse.

As fer Aunty's quotient of respect, and manners? Brother Boney, if I warn't showin' ya some respect and tolerance Aunty would have hit the delete button two comments back.

Boney, doan ya see? What ya show to Aunty is the standard intolerance of liberals. They hate logic, they can't argue on substance, so they flail out at the writer/speaker.

Finally, Sugar pie, ya' wouldn't recognize Catholicism if it snatched yore drowning, choking frame outa the Styx and gave you mouth to mouth respiration,

Aunty Belle said...

Off fer a few days...will be back.

boneman said...

you forgot capitalism.

I know way more than you would imagine about the Catholic Church.

You pick out a group and say that ain't natural...how magnanimous of you. But then, you also think he Bible was written with the hand of God, and that ain't so at all (and even you don't believe in it without turning things to your own selfish reasonning.
(You do want more of us to turn our plows into weapons and go fight your incredibly senseless war, eh?)

Dang! I only have myself to blame, I guess. That Ardlair fellow said you were like this, and i reckon he was right.

Anonymous said...

Capitalism is not utopian. It does not seek to perfect man.

I doan have to imagine, the evidence is in front of me. Nickel analogy: sittin' in a physics class for a year does not mean ya' know physics.

Aunty din't say it is unnatural--nature did. It ain't about anybody being magnanimous--it is about being truthful. Sex is designed to unite the two complementary halves of the human species--and to produce the next generation of humans. That is the truth of the design and function.

Aunty din't say the bible came "from the hand of God", this is evidence of yore readin' too quickly or readin' into what I wrote what you want to talk about.

Aunty said the bible is inspired by God and what is in it is His Revelation to Mankind.

Sigh...we have been over the war thang, Boney. It would make ya feel better to label Aunty as a warmonger (there's a mannerly tolerance fer ya!) but it cain't hold up--yore trouble is that youse enthralled to an ideology and refuse to think deeply. Ya kill more people with appeasement of evil that ya do in a war.

Takin' instruction from Arlair huh?
Well, Sugar, I reckon ya'll has much in common. Ya'll can hep each other find that bench ole weary Ardlair is lookin' fer.


Enemy of the Republic said...

I got my husband that mag for Christmas. I don't see it as conservative per se, but rational. He reads it cover to cover. I am afraid I don't read it at all.