Politics - right wingers and bigots are less intelligent than the left wingers.

[BadFish]

One more quick binfest before the season starts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, says a controversial new study.

Conservative politics work almost as a 'gateway' into prejudice against others, say the Canadian academics.

The paper analysed large UK studies which compared childhood intelligence with political views in adulthood across more than 15,000 people.

The authors claim that people with low intelligence gravitate towards right-wing views because they make them feel safe.
Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron
Labour party leader Ed Miliband

The survey, which compared childhood intelligence with political views, is bad news for David Cameron, the Conservative Party Prime Minister but should give a lift to Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, pictured in Question Time

Crucially, people's educational level is not what determines whether they are racist or not - it's innate intelligence, according to the academics.

Social status also appears to play no part.

The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people.
President Barack Obama
Romney

Left-wingers tend to be more open-minded says the survey - Democrats voted in first black U.S. president Barack Obama. But right-wing ideology forms a pathway for prejudice - Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, pictured right, was glitter-bombed yesterday by gay-rights activists because of his views

'Cognitive abilities are critical in forming impressions of other people and in being open minded,' say the researchers.

'Individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate towards more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.

'It provides a sense of order.'

The study, by academics at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, used information from two UK studies from 1958 and 1970 , where several thousand children were assessed for intelligence at age 10 and 11, and then asked political questions aged 33.

The 1958 National Child Development involved 4,267 men and 4,537 women born in 1958.


More...

RIGHTMINDS: Does a low IQ make you right-wing? That depends on how you define left and right
As scientists discover how to 'translate' brainwaves into words... Could a machine read your innermost thoughts?
How everyone from top civil servants to TV presenters are using a loophole to only pay 21% tax - and how you can do the same

'Individuals with lower abilities may gravitate towards right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.
It provides a sense of order,' say the academics

The British Cohort Study involved 3,412 men and 3,658 women born in 1970.

It's the first time the data from these studies has been used in this way.

In adulthood, the children were asked whether they agreed with statements such as, 'I wouldn't mind working with people from other races,' and 'I wouldn't mind if a family of a different race moved next door.'

They were also asked whether they agreed with statements about typically right-wing and socially conservative politics such as, 'Give law breakers stiffer sentences,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.'

The researchers also compared their results against a 1986 American study which included tests of cognitive ability and questions assessing prejudice against homosexuals.

The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics.

The authors also claim that conservative politics is part of a complex relationship that leads people to become prejudices.

'Conservative ideology represents a critical pathway through which childhood intelligence predicts racism in adulthood,' says the paper.

'In psychological terms, the relation between intelligence and prejudice may stem from the propensity of individuals with lower cognitive ability to endorse more right wing conservative ideologies because such ideologies offer a psychological sense of stability and order.'

'Clearly, however, all socially conservative people are not prejudiced, and all prejudiced persons are not conservative.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html#ixzz235OdNYis

 

[Philzo-93]

Unless you're Boris Johnson

 

[Weststander]

I agree. The following are/were clearly more intelligent than right wingers and bigots:

Stalin.
Derek Hatton (as was).
Robert Mugabe.
Pol Pot.
Alex Salmond.

 

[Acker79]

I don't think that's new. I've seen similar statistics before. I believe it's also similar with religion, i.e more fervent religious people tend to be less intelligent.

 

[BadFish]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/05/daily-mail-calls-rightwingers-stupid

The Guardians take on the article (just in case any right wingers are not upset enough).

 

[TheJasperCo]

In this day and age we can only strive for equality for all people. Nationalism or anything close is selfish and potentially racist. Left wing all the way.

There's definitely nothing wrong with nationalism, certainly nothing selfish or racist about it. It's simply pride in your background and country, something that's been lost from society over the years because of left-wing mentality in governments of the past 15-20 years.

 

[cyrilthesinik]

i fink that's wubish

 

[HOFNSKIN]

Every self seeking right wing ignorant bastard i have ever known has been thick. Case proved.

 

[clapham_gull]

There's definitely nothing wrong with nationalism, certainly nothing selfish or racist about it. It's simply pride in your background and country, something that's been lost from society over the years because of left-wing mentality in governments of the past 15-20 years.

Somewhat meaningless argument because it implies that China, North Korea and the former USSR aren't/weren't capable of national pride either.

It is extreme right wing thinking that has buggered up national pride because they have attempted to claim it as their own, even the flag.

That's why people have a problem with it, because they worry about being associated with the far right

Sad but true.

 

[misterspatch]

So will buckley, as a right winger is what now? And he's different from Nooney, left wing, in what way?

 

[GreersElbow]

In this day and age we can only strive for equality for all people. Nationalism or anything close is selfish and potentially racist. Left wing all the way.

I suppose you're infavour of left-wing nationalism then

Are right-wing libertarians "stupid" Many libertarians don't call themselves conservative, but economically, they're to the right. So I suppose that means they're stupid.

I think the report is flawed, there's no set "Right-left wing"/ Socially, the BNP is right-wing. Economically, it's left....so where do you balance it.

 

[BadFish]

There's definitely nothing wrong with nationalism, certainly nothing selfish or racist about it. It's simply pride in your background and country, something that's been lost from society over the years because of left-wing mentality in governments of the past 15-20 years.

The thing is that if you begin to look at other cultures you realise that the things that we hold great pride in are shared through ever country in the world.

I am proud of being, English, Welsh, British, Austrlian and human. This planet holds many things to inspire awe and it doesnmt matter where you draw the borders.

Nationalism, cityism, townism, suburbism, postcodeism are not helpful in any way. I take you point that thei is nothing wrong with pride in you culture but to define that by lines on a map is folly.

 

[BadFish]

I suppose you're infavour of left-wing nationalism then

Are right-wing libertarians "stupid" Many libertarians don't call themselves conservative, but economically, they're to the right. So I suppose that means they're stupid.

I think the report is flawed, there's no set "Right-left wing"/ Socially, the BNP is right-wing. Economically, it's left....so where do you balance it.

The article implies the they are talking about social politics not economic politics. You would have got that if you weren't so right wing !!)

That was a joke by the way!

 

[GreersElbow]

There is the left-right and then libertarianism-authoritarianism, neither is mutually exclusive. There is authoritarian socialism as in North Korea, but there is also the fantasy libertarian socialism that the hippies seem to suggest might work.

Everyone knows that some people can follow the law and others can't - we can only conclude that total libertarianism would not work. Equally most people accept that they don't want every aspect of their life governed as according to what the state believes is best for everyone - because everyone is different. As a result most rational minded people will agree that we need both authoritarianism and libertarianism balanced in equilibrium for the perfect society (or at least until society is producing perfect people). Not far from what we have in the UK and is something which we should be proud of.

"Total libertarianism wouldn't work" - Flawed, as this is the assumption human beings are all the same - you later state that "rational minded people will agree", what's the standard rational minded person. Authoritarianism IS NOT needed for a "perfect society", sounds incredibly Hitleresque. I also like how you state everyone's different, then claim most people agree with the mixture of authoritarianism and libertarianism.

The main flaw in your post is that they're polar opposites. You cannot have liberty with authoritarianism, this is fundamentally agreed amongst philosophers.

Libertarianism is often associated with anarchism, which is flawed. As in a Hayekian libertarian society, laws are there to protect the individual and their property. Everything else would be intrusive on another's life, but he doe agree to some extent with some laws in social-sphere - mainly takes a utilitarian approach of what produces the maximum utility within society, this has never been achieved as we've always had the state telling us what to do, and what not to do with the assumption we're all irrational to make said choices.

The UK is very far from any form of libertarianism, if anything it would be closer to authoritarian with some laws - most recently the "Extreme pornography" case which the CPS has plenty to answer, we also don't have maximum "economic liberty" and we also have some ridiculous anti-terror laws that contradict the ECHR.

 

[GreersElbow]

The article implies the they are talking about social politics not economic politics. You would have got that if you weren't so right wing !!)

That was a joke by the way!

Darn lefty, why don't you go suck on the nipples of your nanny state

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

The left are every bit as bad as the right in wanting to impose their views on how people should live their lives and they are happy to do it by creating political nanny states to do it.


Some of the most moronic people I've come across have been socialists.

The fuckers just don't live in the real world most of the time.

 

[dingodan]

I agree. The following are/were clearly more intelligent than right wingers and bigots:

Stalin.
Derek Hatton (as was).
Robert Mugabe.
Pol Pot.
Alex Salmond.

Indeed, whether you go right in the circle, or left in the circle, you always end up in the same place.

The whole concept of right vs left is totally bogus. The real contest is Liberty vs Tyranny. End of.

 

[dingodan]

"Total libertarianism wouldn't work" - Flawed, as this is the assumption human beings are all the same - you later state that "rational minded people will agree", what's the standard rational minded person. Authoritarianism IS NOT needed for a "perfect society", sounds incredibly Hitleresque. I also like how you state everyone's different, then claim most people agree with the mixture of authoritarianism and libertarianism.

The main flaw in your post is that they're polar opposites. You cannot have liberty with authoritarianism, this is fundamentally agreed amongst philosophers.

Libertarianism is often associated with anarchism, which is flawed. As in a Hayekian libertarian society, laws are there to protect the individual and their property. Everything else would be intrusive on another's life, but he doe agree to some extent with some laws in social-sphere - mainly takes a utilitarian approach of what produces the maximum utility within society, this has never been achieved as we've always had the state telling us what to do, and what not to do with the assumption we're all irrational to make said choices.

The UK is very far from any form of libertarianism, if anything it would be closer to authoritarian with some laws - most recently the "Extreme pornography" case which the CPS has plenty to answer, we also don't have maximum "economic liberty" and we also have some ridiculous anti-terror laws that contradict the ECHR.

Good post. A Libertarian society would not be lawless at all. The principle is non-violation. You cannot hurt or harm other people, you cannot steal and you cannot commit fraud. All of the force used to impose statutes, acts and regulations on people, that is what goes against the law.

I don't necessarily agree that authoritarianism is required for Liberty to exist. But it is true that authority can exist, the law can exist, in fact it must, in order to have a truly free society. But then the question is who is going to "make up the law"? If thought about like this tyranny seems like it can always be just a few bad ideas away. What people need to do is understand the nature of Law. I recommend a book by Frederic Bastiat called "The Law".

"If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups."
― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

 

[brightonrock]

In my experience it's not about being left wing or right wing, but how far (in either direction) from centre a person is, that dictates their intelligence. The brightest people are able to see and understand the opposite view, and hence are likely to be more centralist. The more right or left wing you go, the more close-minded that person becomes and completely unwilling to accept facts that don't fit with their personal ideology, so a militant left-wing anarchist/socialist is just as tedious company as a wild-eyed panicking xenophobe from the right.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

One more quick binfest before the season starts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, says a controversial new study.

Conservative politics work almost as a 'gateway' into prejudice against others, say the Canadian academics.

The paper analysed large UK studies which compared childhood intelligence with political views in adulthood across more than 15,000 people.

The authors claim that people with low intelligence gravitate towards right-wing views because they make them feel safe.
Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron
Labour party leader Ed Miliband

The survey, which compared childhood intelligence with political views, is bad news for David Cameron, the Conservative Party Prime Minister but should give a lift to Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, pictured in Question Time

Crucially, people's educational level is not what determines whether they are racist or not - it's innate intelligence, according to the academics.

Social status also appears to play no part.

The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people.
President Barack Obama
Romney

Left-wingers tend to be more open-minded says the survey - Democrats voted in first black U.S. president Barack Obama. But right-wing ideology forms a pathway for prejudice - Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, pictured right, was glitter-bombed yesterday by gay-rights activists because of his views

'Cognitive abilities are critical in forming impressions of other people and in being open minded,' say the researchers.

'Individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate towards more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.

'It provides a sense of order.'

The study, by academics at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, used information from two UK studies from 1958 and 1970 , where several thousand children were assessed for intelligence at age 10 and 11, and then asked political questions aged 33.

The 1958 National Child Development involved 4,267 men and 4,537 women born in 1958.


More...

RIGHTMINDS: Does a low IQ make you right-wing? That depends on how you define left and right
As scientists discover how to 'translate' brainwaves into words... Could a machine read your innermost thoughts?
How everyone from top civil servants to TV presenters are using a loophole to only pay 21% tax - and how you can do the same

'Individuals with lower abilities may gravitate towards right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.
It provides a sense of order,' say the academics

The British Cohort Study involved 3,412 men and 3,658 women born in 1970.

It's the first time the data from these studies has been used in this way.

In adulthood, the children were asked whether they agreed with statements such as, 'I wouldn't mind working with people from other races,' and 'I wouldn't mind if a family of a different race moved next door.'

They were also asked whether they agreed with statements about typically right-wing and socially conservative politics such as, 'Give law breakers stiffer sentences,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.'

The researchers also compared their results against a 1986 American study which included tests of cognitive ability and questions assessing prejudice against homosexuals.

The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics.

The authors also claim that conservative politics is part of a complex relationship that leads people to become prejudices.

'Conservative ideology represents a critical pathway through which childhood intelligence predicts racism in adulthood,' says the paper.

'In psychological terms, the relation between intelligence and prejudice may stem from the propensity of individuals with lower cognitive ability to endorse more right wing conservative ideologies because such ideologies offer a psychological sense of stability and order.'

'Clearly, however, all socially conservative people are not prejudiced, and all prejudiced persons are not conservative.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html#ixzz235OdNYis

Is the article honestly saying that because of their political views Ed Milliband is more intelligent than Cameron?? As for left wingers being more open minded,tell that to the Union leaders who are paid vast sums bringing their members out on strike to justify their position,the latest examples are trying come out on strike just before the Olympics...is that not trying to blackmail the country!!
Those posted survey's are based on surveys from 1958/1970....jeez,we are discussing 54 /42 year old surveys...c'mon the world has moved on from those decades.
I'm more right wing than left,but not a racist as I see people for the inner person,colour of skin has nothing to do with it...there are good and bad amongst all people.The left seem to want everybody to be the same...so everyone is classed at the lowest common denominater,can you tell me that the leaders of Labour and the Communist party feel that they are the common people. There must be leaders otherwise it's mob rule. We have seen what a mess the Labour party has done leaving this country in the mire,summed up by the message left when they departed office...'There's no money left!'
Not saying all they have done has been wrong...NHS being one...not expecting everyone to agree with me,but that is what political choice is about!
Peace fellow humans.