What is a Tory?

[NickDReed]

We as a species are really good at 'othering' people, or groups of them.

I was reading a thread on here where a generalisation was made 'I can see it would be a problem for a tory'. I will point out at this stage that this is not intended as an attack on the individual who made the remark. Nor is it a critique of a political position, the statement got me to thinking and is purely the example from which my thought process extrapolated.

I am as guilty as anyone else of othering people and generalising.

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character. What is a Tory? Will I know one when I see them, do they all look alike? Does your voting history make you one? Is it your economic outlook? The amount of money you have in the bank? How willing you are to accept government involvement in your life? Did Tories exist by another name when we were hunter gatherers? Am I a Tory?

What is it about us as a species that can take a single attribute of an individual and seeming cease to look any further beyond that? It seems so ingrained in our make up to see and focus on the differences than to search for the similarities. Or is it that we assume similarities, and then when we come across a difference we are stopped in our tracks and cannot get back to seeing the similarities?

Is this some sort of evolutionary response developed in our past, and if so does it serve a purpose in modern society? We are the single life form in the known universe that has the ability to communicate with each other on such a large scale in such a complex manner, it seems logical that we should be able to come the mutual understandings on most topics.

I'm reluctant to pursue the political subject as I'm aware of what this my descend (or escalate) into, but it is the topic that initiated my thoughts. It seems that we (Wester(?) humans) are becoming increasingly polarised and it appears that this is largely down political lines, many times on topics that have seemingly little to do with what would have been traditionally consider Left or Right. There are a number of things that I believe that people would say are 'Right Wing' ideas or ideals, there are probably an equal number that would be considered 'Left Wing'. I have no doubt that some on here who have read things I have posted and made a decision on 'what' I am, be that political or anything else. Based off posts on an Off Topic thread on a woodworking forum, I would anticipate a significant number of us have formed opinions on others that we fail to see beyond.

It becomes increasingly interesting to me that once that point of 'othering' occurs it seems difficult to return from it to (re)discover the similarities we all share.

I can't imagine any of us are one thing in isolation, even those of us who appear consistent to our internal image of what they are. Surely we are all far more alike than we would all probably feel is comfortable to acknowledge.

Is it possible we are hamstrung by an evolutionary mechanism to other people that prevents us from looking beyond the differences to a point that will diminish our ability to progress as a civilisation, or worse lead to its downfall?

Anyway, this is what my internal monologue looks like in Ariel font 15................rambling.

Happy Tuesday fellow humans I have more in common with than not.

 

[Tris]

It's strange, isn't it? We all live in the same, fairly small planet and bleed the same colour blood and yet we look for difference before similarity. Go figure

More on topic I seem to recall the term came from a political insult, you were a Whig or a Tory. Possibly 16th century? Hopefully someone else on here was paying more attention in history lessons than I was

 

[Tris]

A quick check online shows that apparently the term Tory derives from an Irish word torai, meaning outlaw or robber!

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

We as a species are really good at 'othering' people, or groups of them.

I was reading a thread on here where a generalisation was made 'I can see it would be a problem for a tory'. I will point out at this stage that this is not intended as an attack on the individual who made the remark. Nor is it a critique of a political position, the statement got me to thinking and is purely the example from which my thought process extrapolated.

I am as guilty as anyone else of othering people and generalising.

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character. What is a Tory? Will I know one when I see them, do they all look alike? Does your voting history make you one? Is it your economic outlook? The amount of money you have in the bank? How willing you are to accept government involvement in your life? Did Tories exist by another name when we were hunter gatherers? Am I a Tory?

What is it about us as a species that can take a single attribute of an individual and seeming cease to look any further beyond that? It seems so ingrained in our make up to see and focus on the differences than to search for the similarities. Or is it that we assume similarities, and then when we come across a difference we are stopped in our tracks and cannot get back to seeing the similarities?

Is this some sort of evolutionary response developed in our past, and if so does it serve a purpose in modern society? We are the single life form in the known universe that has the ability to communicate with each other on such a large scale in such a complex manner, it seems logical that we should be able to come the mutual understandings on most topics.

I'm reluctant to pursue the political subject as I'm aware of what this my descend (or escalate) into, but it is the topic that initiated my thoughts. It seems that we (Wester(?) humans) are becoming increasingly polarised and it appears that this is largely down political lines, many times on topics that have seemingly little to do with what would have been traditionally consider Left or Right. There are a number of things that I believe that people would say are 'Right Wing' ideas or ideals, there are probably an equal number that would be considered 'Left Wing'. I have no doubt that some on here who have read things I have posted and made a decision on 'what' I am, be that political or anything else. Based off posts on an Off Topic thread on a woodworking forum, I would anticipate a significant number of us have formed opinions on others that we fail to see beyond.

It becomes increasingly interesting to me that once that point of 'othering' occurs it seems difficult to return from it to (re)discover the similarities we all share.

I can't imagine any of us are one thing in isolation, even those of us who appear consistent to our internal image of what they are. Surely we are all far more alike than we would all probably feel is comfortable to acknowledge.

Is it possible we are hamstrung by an evolutionary mechanism to other people that prevents us from looking beyond the differences to a point that will diminish our ability to progress as a civilisation, or worse lead to its downfall?

Anyway, this is what my internal monologue looks like in Ariel font 15................rambling.

Happy Tuesday fellow humans I have more in common with than not.

Profound topic for an off-topic thread!

A couple of ponderings from me:

I often get misrepresented as a raving lefty. Personally, I don't think that I am. Maybe you yourself have an opinion?

A part of the "othering" that you describe - I think - can be attributed to tribalism connected to basic survival instinct, where "the tribe" was the be all and end all of your existence. Other tribes were typically the enemy. Not always at the beginning - but humans are jerks and sooner or later our base instincts of one individual would be almost certain to kick off trouble.

Head over heart is my choice (or maybe my nurture or nature or both). Personal trait is analysis and looking for wider connections - I loathe change for change's sake and if you know anything at all about the system we have for transatlantic flying you'll know that the basic concept is a good one and that it hasn't therefore changed (big picture) since its inception in 1960s - this is my base model for why things are the way they are - most things evolve to the way they are because this is the best that can be done "overall". I'm not a blockage to change, per se, but I do look for provenance and the basic reason for that provenance to exist. Sometimes, change is an improvement over provenance, but quite often it is not.

Head over heart is not everyone's choice, though - we are all different, after all, and that ought to be celebrated... but...

I guess where I'm going with this is that basic human instinct serves to make us "tribal" and if we see someone as "not of our tribe" human instinct is often to marginalise that person, and even one single trait can be the "marker" by which you can marginalise someone.

After the marginalisation (othering) it is an easy step to "disregard", "ignore" or "disagree" with anything that they say. For no other reason than they are not of your tribe because they have been labelled, categorised and marginalised. You can probably see that interplay occurring on other off topic threads on this very forum and every other forum you've ever had the pleasure to be involved in.

I think I got my head around that when I was a teen. I'm a ginger. That might be why I needed to get my head around it?????

I think it's why I drill down into facts. They're preferable to feelings in a reasoned discussion.

But after the discussion I'm still eager to go for a beer with the other not of my tribe!

 

[Jacob]

We as a species are really good at 'othering' people, or groups of them.

I was reading a thread on here where a generalisation was made 'I can see it would be a problem for a tory'. I will point out at this stage that this is not intended as an attack on the individual who made the remark. Nor is it a critique of a political position, the statement got me to thinking and is purely the example from which my thought process extrapolated.

I am as guilty as anyone else of othering people and generalising.

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character. What is a Tory? Will I know one when I see them, do they all look alike? Does your voting history make you one? Is it your economic outlook? The amount of money you have in the bank? How willing you are to accept government involvement in your life? Did Tories exist by another name when we were hunter gatherers? Am I a Tory?

What is it about us as a species that can take a single attribute of an individual and seeming cease to look any further beyond that? It seems so ingrained in our make up to see and focus on the differences than to search for the similarities. Or is it that we assume similarities, and then when we come across a difference we are stopped in our tracks and cannot get back to seeing the similarities?

Is this some sort of evolutionary response developed in our past, and if so does it serve a purpose in modern society? We are the single life form in the known universe that has the ability to communicate with each other on such a large scale in such a complex manner, it seems logical that we should be able to come the mutual understandings on most topics.

I'm reluctant to pursue the political subject as I'm aware of what this my descend (or escalate) into, but it is the topic that initiated my thoughts. It seems that we (Wester(?) humans) are becoming increasingly polarised and it appears that this is largely down political lines, many times on topics that have seemingly little to do with what would have been traditionally consider Left or Right. There are a number of things that I believe that people would say are 'Right Wing' ideas or ideals, there are probably an equal number that would be considered 'Left Wing'. I have no doubt that some on here who have read things I have posted and made a decision on 'what' I am, be that political or anything else. Based off posts on an Off Topic thread on a woodworking forum, I would anticipate a significant number of us have formed opinions on others that we fail to see beyond.

It becomes increasingly interesting to me that once that point of 'othering' occurs it seems difficult to return from it to (re)discover the similarities we all share.

I can't imagine any of us are one thing in isolation, even those of us who appear consistent to our internal image of what they are. Surely we are all far more alike than we would all probably feel is comfortable to acknowledge.

Is it possible we are hamstrung by an evolutionary mechanism to other people that prevents us from looking beyond the differences to a point that will diminish our ability to progress as a civilisation, or worse lead to its downfall?

Anyway, this is what my internal monologue looks like in Ariel font 15................rambling.

Happy Tuesday fellow humans I have more in common with than not.

 

[Jacob]

We as a species are really good at 'othering' people, or groups of them.

I was reading a thread on here where a generalisation was made 'I can see it would be a problem for a tory'.

Guilty! I cannot tell a lie! https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/another-ban-on-the-way.149949/page-5#post-1772072
But it wasn't a generalisation it was with reference to a particular moral dilemma (for a tory!)

I will point out at this stage that this is not intended as an attack on the individual who made the remark. Nor is it a critique of a political position, the statement got me to thinking and is purely the example from which my thought process extrapolated.

Sounds very much like "I'm not anti-vax, but...."

I am as guilty as anyone else of othering people and generalising.

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character.

It's not about character it's about beliefs, in this case specifically associated with named groups, four letter or not.
"Othering" has nothing to do with it. A bit self pitying - little connection with those who really are disadvantaged by it.
https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...-techniques-of-othering-and-how-to-avoid-them
Anyway - good to see a tory on the defensive and trying to deflect comment by muddying the issue and changing the subject!

 

[Chris152]

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character.

Surely, the point is that it identifies someone's politics, and certain of their values, but it doesn't describe the complex that is the person. It's like saying someone is white or black - in that case, it's just one attribute, maybe certain attitudes, but not the whole person.

 

[selectortone]

It's strange, isn't it? We all live in the same, fairly small planet and bleed the same colour blood and yet we look for difference before similarity. Go figure

Tribalism has existed since the dawn of man. Banding together to fight over territory, waterholes, best hunting or whatever. We are not so different from our ancestors.

 

[NickDReed]

It's strange, isn't it? We all live in the same, fairly small planet and bleed the same colour blood and yet we look for difference before similarity. Go figure

More on topic I seem to recall the term came from a political insult, you were a Whig or a Tory. Possibly 16th century? Hopefully someone else on here was paying more attention in history lessons than I was

I think I'd consider your first sentence more on topic. The politic angle was just the reason I started thinking, then typing. I'm fairly sure our ability to communicate has either regressed or stagnated while our technology has progressed exponentially. It might be the end of us.

Second post is interesting, so presumably it was intended as an insult.

 

[NickDReed]

Surely, the point is that it identifies someone's politics, and certain of their values, but it doesn't describe the complex that is the person. It's like saying someone is white or black - in that case, it's just one attribute, maybe certain attitudes, but not the whole person.

I suppose my point is someone's politics is rarely so cut and dried I can have beliefs and opinions that might fit in both camps. So is it a sum of the balance of your opinions as to what you're labelled?

 

[RobinBHM]

If you put a bunch of people together, if politics was never discussed.....would they eventually form groups that echo their political beliefs

 

[Geoff_S]

We as a species are really good at 'othering' people, or groups of them.

I was reading a thread on here where a generalisation was made 'I can see it would be a problem for a tory'. I will point out at this stage that this is not intended as an attack on the individual who made the remark. Nor is it a critique of a political position, the statement got me to thinking and is purely the example from which my thought process extrapolated.

I am as guilty as anyone else of othering people and generalising.

I'm fascinated by the idea that something as complex at the human persona can be reduced to a single (in this case four letter) word that can be used as a way to describe the entirety of someone's character. What is a Tory? Will I know one when I see them, do they all look alike? Does your voting history make you one? Is it your economic outlook? The amount of money you have in the bank? How willing you are to accept government involvement in your life? Did Tories exist by another name when we were hunter gatherers? Am I a Tory?

What is it about us as a species that can take a single attribute of an individual and seeming cease to look any further beyond that? It seems so ingrained in our make up to see and focus on the differences than to search for the similarities. Or is it that we assume similarities, and then when we come across a difference we are stopped in our tracks and cannot get back to seeing the similarities?

Is this some sort of evolutionary response developed in our past, and if so does it serve a purpose in modern society? We are the single life form in the known universe that has the ability to communicate with each other on such a large scale in such a complex manner, it seems logical that we should be able to come the mutual understandings on most topics.

I'm reluctant to pursue the political subject as I'm aware of what this my descend (or escalate) into, but it is the topic that initiated my thoughts. It seems that we (Wester(?) humans) are becoming increasingly polarised and it appears that this is largely down political lines, many times on topics that have seemingly little to do with what would have been traditionally consider Left or Right. There are a number of things that I believe that people would say are 'Right Wing' ideas or ideals, there are probably an equal number that would be considered 'Left Wing'. I have no doubt that some on here who have read things I have posted and made a decision on 'what' I am, be that political or anything else. Based off posts on an Off Topic thread on a woodworking forum, I would anticipate a significant number of us have formed opinions on others that we fail to see beyond.

It becomes increasingly interesting to me that once that point of 'othering' occurs it seems difficult to return from it to (re)discover the similarities we all share.

I can't imagine any of us are one thing in isolation, even those of us who appear consistent to our internal image of what they are. Surely we are all far more alike than we would all probably feel is comfortable to acknowledge.

Is it possible we are hamstrung by an evolutionary mechanism to other people that prevents us from looking beyond the differences to a point that will diminish our ability to progress as a civilisation, or worse lead to its downfall?

Anyway, this is what my internal monologue looks like in Ariel font 15................rambling.

Happy Tuesday fellow humans I have more in common with than not.

Well, if that person supports the Conservative party, they are a Tory while they are supporting them.

If they were expressing support for a Tory policy, then not necessarily.

 

[RobinBHM]

What is a Tory?

A =mostly unemployed

 

[NickDReed]

Tribalism has existed since the dawn of man. Banding together to fight over territory, waterholes, best hunting or whatever. We are not so different from our ancestors.

But we have nukes and drones and the ability to remotely kill each other..... Which we seem to prefer to use over our ability to communicate constructively. That's on a global level.

In a microcosm our inability to communicate seems to just result in name calling rather than constructive communication.

 

[selectortone]

But we have nukes and drones and the ability to remotely kill each other...

Of course we do. Human nature dictates that every tribe has to have a leader. Our ancestors fought with clubs and flint knives over who got the best women and the best food. It's just a matter of scale. Now we have Putin, Xi and (God help us) quite possibly Trump, and all the other despots. The weapons might have got bigger but they're still fighting over who has the biggest ****.

 

[TRITON]

- tank the economy
- Create the highest tax burden since WWII
- Cause Record NHS waiting lists
- Implement huge energy bills
- Enact the biggest ever fall in living standards
- Cause strikes
- Suppress protesting
- Allow water companies to create rivers of sh*t

If you think you could do all this, then there is a job for you in the conservative party.
You will be paid handsomely

 

[Jacob]

But we have nukes and drones and the ability to remotely kill each other..... Which we seem to prefer to use over our ability to communicate constructively. That's on a global level.

In a microcosm our inability to communicate seems to just result in name calling rather than constructive communication.

If you take this thread and others similar we seem to be communicating exceptionally well.
Unusual to be without the usual veto on talking about politics and congratulations to the mods for handling it so well.
I think what you mean is your own inability to communicate without hearing opposing views.
You don't have to participate if you don't want to.
You seem to be attacking the messenger and/or the medium, rather than addressing the issues.

 

[Fitzroy]

Much of the theory comes down to unconscious bias and the evolutionary benefit these bring. To solve maths problem takes lots of brain power and hence energy expenditure, if we can simply jump to the answer this takes less effort and energy. Our brains like to generate these shortcuts and mental models. I would expect in a tribe or group we then reinforce these models through group think or common views.

One example is the fallacy of women drivers being worse. The data shows this is untrue, however many people (men and women) have heard the statement in their early life. As their life progresses every driver error they see by a women adds evidence and weight to their model. When they witness good driving or errors by men the brain does not subtract this from the model. This is called confirmation bias.

There are lots of other subconscious biases that are used as shortcuts and most of them can create the conditions for othering.

BTW I’m not debating how the latest round of conservative government screwed up most things, there is plenty of data showing the damage they did. Yes there are also some improvements in some data and if you wish to cherry pick only the good stuff to confirm your view the Conservative Party are ok well you’ve just proven the theory of confirmation bias.

Fitz.

 

[AJB Temple]

Tory - a word used by people stuck in the past. Invariably judgemental.

 

[Jacob]

Tory - a word used by people stuck in the past.

Well tories are stuck in the past - is that what you mean?

Invariably judgemental.

Depends who is saying it.
I didn't realise tories felt it was something to be ashamed of. Maybe they should reconsider their positions?
I'm not ashamed of being called a raving lefty, socialist, woke etc. Flattered in fact.
Do tories worry about self-identifying as the "un-woke"? Always struck me as an odd badge to choose to wear.