Politicians and political analysts continue to use a single liberal-conservative dimension to analyze the ideological views of the American people, but that approach is increasingly inadequate. Professors Maddox and Lilie have gone beyond the liberal-conservative continuum. By separating questions aof economic policy from issues involving civil liberties, they find four basic ideological group: liberals, conservatives, libertarians, and populists. This book goes a long way toward explaining such phenomena as ticket-splitting, the impact of the baby-boom generation, and the internal conflicts both major parties will face over the next few years.

Buried in many people and operating largely outside the realm of conscious thought are forces inclining us toward liberal or conservative political convictions. Our biology predisposes us to see and understand the world in different ways, not always reason and the careful consideration of facts. These predispositions are in turn responsible for a significant portion of the political and ideological conflict that marks human history. With verve and wit, renowned social scientists John Hibbing, Kevin Smith, and John Alford—pioneers in the field of biopolitics—present overwhelming evidence that people differ politically not just because they grew up in different cultures or were presented with different information. Despite the oft-heard longing for consensus, unity, and peace, the universal rift between conservatives and liberals endures because people have diverse psychological, physiological, and genetic traits. These biological differences influence much of what makes people who they are, including their orientations to politics. Political disputes typically spring from the assumption that those who do not agree with us are shallow, misguided, uninformed, and ignorant. Predisposed suggests instead that political opponents simply experience, process, and respond to the world differently. It follows, then, that the key to getting along politically is not the ability of one side to persuade the other side to see the error of its ways but rather the ability of each side to see that the other is different, not just politically, but physically. Predisposed will change the way you think about politics and partisan conflict. As a bonus, the book includes a "Left/Right 20 Questions" game to test whether your predispositions lean liberal or conservative.

This book clarifies differences between the intellectual positions of the so-called two-party system of liberals and conservatives in American Protestant Christianity. Nancey Murphy advances the thesis that the philosophy of the modern period is largely responsible for the polarity of Protestant Christian thought. A second thesis is that the modern philosophical positions driving the division between liberals and conservatives have themselves been called into question. This, then, presents the opportunity to ask how theology ought to be done in a postmodern era and to envision a rapprochement between theologians of the left and right. The book concludes by speculating on the future and the likelihood that the compulsion to separate into two distinct camps will be precluded by the coexistence of a wide range of theological positions from left to right.

A guide to productive dialogue across ideological divides with practical tools for building trust, defusing hostility, and approaching hot-button topics. With the election of President Biden, many liberals thought that the world of political discourse would somehow go back to normal. But the continued extremism of Republican politicians and conservative pundits has only stoked the flames of progressive disdain in ways that make it harder than ever to engage in civil debate. In Beyond Contempt, Erica Etelson shows us how to communicate effectively across the political divide without soft-pedaling our beliefs—or playing into the hands of divisive politicians. Using Powerful Non-Defensive Communication skill sets, we can express ourselves in ways that inspire open-minded consideration instead of triggering defensive reactions. With detailed instruction and helpful examples, Etelson demonstrates how we can open hearts and minds in unexpected ways.

Originally published in 1984, this book proposes a structural theory of social attitudes, presents the empirical evidence for the theory, and defines and explores liberalism and conservatism and the justification for associating social attitudes with these terms. The core ideas are that the structure of social attitudes, those sets of beliefs about social "objects" or referents shared by many or most people of a society, is basically dualistic rather than bipolar, and that the referents of social attitudes are differentially criterial to individuals and groups of individuals. The common belief that social attitudes are polarized, with liberal beliefs at once end of a continuum and conservative beliefs at the other end, is questioned. Instead, liberalism and conservatism are conceived as separate and independent sets of beliefs. The book will elaborate and explain these statements and bring evidence to bear on the empirical validity.

For the better part of 30 years, liberal bias has dominated mainstream media. But author and political journalist Brian Anderson reveals in his new book that the era of liberal dominance is going the way of the dodo bird.

A conservative college professor's compelling defense of liberal education Not so long ago, conservative intellectuals such as William F. Buckley Jr. believed universities were worth fighting for. Today, conservatives seem more inclined to burn them down. In Let's Be Reasonable, conservative political theorist and professor Jonathan Marks finds in liberal education an antidote to this despair, arguing that the true purpose of college is to encourage people to be reasonable—and revealing why the health of our democracy is at stake. Drawing on the ideas of John Locke and other thinkers, Marks presents the case for why, now more than ever, conservatives must not give up on higher education. He recognizes that professors and administrators frequently adopt the language and priorities of the left, but he explains why conservative nightmare visions of liberal persecution and indoctrination bear little resemblance to what actually goes on in college classrooms. Marks examines why advocates for liberal education struggle to offer a coherent defense of themselves against their conservative critics, and demonstrates why such a defense must rest on the cultivation of reason and of pride in being reasonable. More than just a campus battlefield guide, Let's Be Reasonable recovers what is truly liberal about liberal education—the ability to reason for oneself and with others—and shows why the liberally educated person considers reason to be more than just a tool for scoring political points.