kerkko.fi

An interesting yet disheartening series of socioeconomic experiments shows that those on the lower-income levels are more likely to give and be charitable than their higher paid counterparts. The findings come from experiments carried out by UC Berkeley doctoral student Paul Piff and his team. A recent national survey in the US reiterates the results, revealing lower-income people give more of their hard-earned money to charity than the wealthy.

At a time when the richest one percent of Americans own more than the bottom 90 percent combined, the findings are timely. "Our data suggests that an ironic and self-perpetuating dynamic may in part explain this trend," the researchers write. "Whereas lower-class individuals may give more of their resources away, upper-class individuals may tend to preserve and hold onto their wealth. This differential pattern could exacerbate economic inequality."

Prior research done by Piff and his colleagues suggests lower income people might be more compassionate because they are more closely rooted to and dependent on others, therefore more empathetic. It is also thought that the more money the lower-earning people make in their lifetime, the higher their status becomes. As a result, their ability to connect with others' point-of-view disappears, including the low-income population they were once ties to.

http://www.physorg.com/news201364510.html

Contrary to the Machiavellian cliché, nice people are more likely to rise to power. Then something strange happens: Authority atrophies the very talents that got them there. Surveys of organizations find that the vast majority of rude and inappropriate behaviors, such as the shouting of profanities, come from the offices of those with the most authority. Headlines are filled with the latest misstep of someone in a position of power.

Psychologists refer to this as the paradox of power. The very traits that helped leaders accumulate control in the first place all but disappear once they rise to power. Instead of being polite, honest and outgoing, they become impulsive, reckless and rude. People with lots of authority tend to behave like neurological patients with a damaged orbito-frontal lobe, a brain area that is crucial for empathy and decision-making.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704407804575425561952689390.html

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing on "fear" of President Barack Obama and a promise to "save the country from trending toward socialism." The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how “ego-driven” wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access and “tchochkes.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html

In just a few weeks, the movement to counter the Tea Party Movement has grown from an idea of a few progressive friends to a group of 28,000 members and chapters in major cities across the country. The Coffee Party Movement gives voice to Americans who want to see cooperation in government.

The movement recognizes that the federal government is not the enemy of the people, but the expression of the collective will, and that people must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges that they face. As voters and grassroots volunteers, the movement will support leaders who work toward positive solutions.

http://www.facebook.com/coffeeparty

Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on political and religious behaviors with IQ from a large US sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs.

Religion, the theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. "Because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of god everywhere," Kanazawa said.

Humans had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring. The conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It is unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

George Washington University professor James Bailey said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. Aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies may be "ways to communicate that you are pretty smart," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html

Francis Bacon was paraphrased as saying "knowledge is power." [In his time -- the late 16th century, --] the only people that had access to books and the literacy to unlock the wisdom within were the wealthy with the time and inclination to learn.

Back then, the friction that held people back from learning was low literacy, a lack of access to books and very little time. Now, that friction is almost non-existent. Now, the only real friction that exists is our own desire for knowledge.

Social networks may be encouraging younger people to get involved in politics. More and more people are getting involved in politics and are feeling they can make a difference. These are all signs of social media's growing influence in politics.

We are no longer consumers of passive messages; we are active participants. We get news through the network we have created, and the news we pass to one another says something about us, what we are interested in, and what is important to us.

http://mashable.com/2010/01/07/social-media-changed-us/