If this was an issue of Genetics, then the trend we have seen would be hopeless. Fortunately, this theory especially as presented by Molyneux is about Epigenetics rather than Genetics as people commonly understand this. Nevertheless, even if this was the case, then the trend to “Socialism” would be baked into the population as a response to the events of the previous generation, rather than any education or information that either side might support. This is clearly flawed.
r & K are reproductive strategies based on animal behavior rather than human behavior. The instinctual basis for this tie indeed exists, but how we interpret and act upon these urges is not fixed. Nevertheless, a better match can be found by fitting “Progressive” vs “Conservative” politics in Myers-Briggs T vs. F - Thinking vs. Feeling type which has been noted frequently when describing how “Progressives” vs. “Conservatives” interpret information. There is some cross-over between “r” vs. “K” and MBTI “T” vs “F” and there is evidence that MBTI primary function preference is Epigenetically or Birth environment determined because this basic preference is essentially fixed and develops within the first year of life.
However, we are not confined to the limits imposed by MBTI or r/K or any of these models which are about bias and preference. Humans are unchained by the shackles of pure instinct by their amazing ability to operate in worlds of ideas and concepts. Tom Wolfe passionately argues that Darwin got it wrong in his argument that Mankind evolved from Apes. He isn’t arguing that Homo Erectus didn’t, but that Mankind is something that is a different class of animal that evolution cannot explain, but rather contradicts. Instead, Mankind developed and has been shaped by the emergence of Language itself.
The Kingdom of Speech - Tom Wolfe
https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Speech-Tom-Wolfe/dp/0316404624
I’ve read the theories that language was encouraged as a way for males to prove their intelligence (fitness), as well as language diversity a way to determine who is in the in group and who is in the outgroup. In the latter, I see it today with teens, SJWs, and technical and scientific disciplines having their unique meanings for words, and it is more important to know the right language to gain membership / status than have necessarily accomplishments.
With SJWs, they actively redefine words to exclude themselves if bad and include themselves if good. That’s a case of trying to modify language in addition to social hierarchy to put themselves at the top and look good. And gaining extra power by being the translator doesn’t hurt.
Dr. Jordan Peterson of the University of Toronto did a video interview with Rebel Media on the distinct personality types of SJWs versus classic liberals. Classic liberals are higher IQ, more verbally fluent. Both “liberals” measure morality based on perceived distress. But SJWs have a stronger correlation with diagnosed mental illness, strict black/white morality more often ascribed to conservative religions, and, ironically in-group/out-group preferences liberals like to deny they have. And their common language redefinition is as much evidence of this (my belief, not his) as their active exclusion and denunciation of those who deviate from the approved check list of beliefs.
I think we’re seeing the result of 2 generations of smart liberals self-select out of the population and the rise from higher birth rates of low IQ “liberals”.
And if you can’t reason with others, use emotion, and if that doesn’t work, violence seems a good option. And SJWs are too ignorant or willfully blind to realize that if they don’t let others air their grievances, there is NO option left but violence ... thank goodness the elections in the US and UK went the way of sanity.
I pray it is cultural, because that can be changed in a couple of years (what we have) but have serious doubts.