It is an old idea that conservates see the world as a dangerous place, while liberals see it as a safe place to explore, hence their greater openness to new ideas and less interest in militarism.
But this is a cartoon. It completely ignores the question of what dangers we are talking about. To take just one example, many liberal feminists are very worried about the danger of rape. So a serious look at the question might produce a result like this:
Decades of research suggest a correlation between belief in a dangerous world and political conservatism. However, research relied on a scale that may overemphasize certain types of dangers. Furthermore, few other world beliefs have been investigated, such that fundamental worldview differences between liberals and conservatives remain largely unknown. A preregistered study of nine samples (N = 5,461; mostly US Americans) found a negligible association between a newly improved measure of generalized dangerous world belief and conservatism, and that the original scale emphasized certain dangers more salient to conservatives (e.g., societal decline) over others most salient for liberals (e.g., injustice). Across many measures of political attitudes, other world beliefs—such as beliefs that the world is Hierarchical, Intentional, Just, and Worth Exploring—each explained several times more variance than dangerous world belief. This suggests the relevance of dangerous world belief to political attitudes has been overstated, and examining other world beliefs may yield insights.
Over the past six months I have spent a lot of time reading various miltiary thinkers and writers, some of whom are very conservative. I will say that a majority are obsessed with danger in the world: Iran-sponsored terrorism, Houthi anti-ship missiles, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. They like to stare at graphs of rising Chinese naval strength and get really mad about it. They identify strongly with Israel as a place under siege by nefarious elements who might attack at any moment, and who can only be stopped by constant armed vigilance. They share videos of crime sprees in the US. They see a world in which everything they love is under constant threat from Bad Guys.
I also follow the environmental news, so I also regularly read pieces by people who think the world is dying from climate change, acidification, toxin poisons, deforestation, and so on.
Who is more afraid?
Some fears cut against each other. While environmentally-minded liberals are afraid of climate chage, many conservatives are afraid of an environmental tyranny that will force them to give up their cars, their houses, their lawns, and their right to have children. Maybe their fears are overblow, but it is not at all hard to find environmentalists who want to ban cars (all of them, not just gas-powered ones) and legally limit childbearing to one per family.
And then there are people like me, who are most afraid of fear itself. None of the American and British commentators I follow is more obsessed with the Ukraine war than I am. Ukraine represents dangers I fear greatly. For me, the greatest danger in the world is what we might broadly call Fascism: armed national pride, fed by a belief that the world is full of enemies who must be opposed by toughness and violence. A fear of disorder so great that it seeks to impose ever greater surveillance, ever greater unity, ever greater control; that equates freedom with chaos. Of that, I am very afraid.
All attempts to reduce political division to simple emotions fail, because the world is too complex, and we are too complex, to be understood reductively.