r-selective species reproduce a lot, don't invest much in individuals, and value self determination more than K-selection species. Examples include rodents, insects, weeds, and bacteria
K-selection species reproduce a little, invest a lot in each individual, and value cooperation more than r-selection species. Examples include elephants, whales, and humans
Conservatives are very closely analogous to r-selection species
Liberals are very closely analogous to K-selection species
K-selection species evolved later and are generally considered more advanced, since they pass the threshold which holds back r-selection species due to their lack of longterm offspring-nurturing, allowing epigenetic information to be passed down in the form of taught behaviors and culture
r-selection strategies are good in rural areas without much of a coordinated support system (lack of infrastructure, lack of centralized resources - have more kids in case some die)
K-selection strategies are good in urban areas with a much more advanced coordinate support system (robust infrastructure, robustly centralized resources - have fewer kids but invest more in them because they probably won't die)
Both aspects are important I guess, but when it comes to overall success K-selective organisms objectively have a longer investment horizon and more compound gains. Ideally you want a balance between investment and enjoyment of the investment, but most people get it wrong and invest with a shorter time horizon.
r-selective pests are successful and will live forever, but they will never be anything more than pests. K-selective animals will never die out either because they are the only ones that can eventually travel to space and stuff.
Education is an inherently K-selective strategy. And conservatives tend to be against it like r-selective species would be. I don't want to go as far as to compare them to weeds and bacteria, but the analogy is oddly fitting
