Why Liberals Are More Intelligent Than Conservatives

[qwe]

the republicans get a lot of votes based on the misguided assumption that they are a party "against wasteful spending" etc

 

[ebola?]

i think, by rightward, he was referring to how wealth has been distributed and handled. the top 2% have had an ever increasing share, the wealthiest sometimes pay the least taxes, the big guys get the big breaks, and our politicians are quite "bought"

This is about right. More precisely, I was describing that the economic policies advocated by both political parties have shifted 'rightward' for the past 50 years (perhaps excepting escalating deficit spending. However, following Reagan, there has been pan-party and pan-elite coalitional agreement on extremely intensive military spending funded primarily by national debt).

And its no longer 'rightward' (and never has been really) considering the make up of Obama's administration.

So the election of a decidedly centrist executive leader upset a fifty-year long trend in shifting party-ideologies?

In my mind when we talk about things like poverty and wealth, political ideology has little to no significance in the grand scheme of the monetary based system imo.

How so?

ebola

 

[Wyld 4 X]

So the election of a decidedly centrist executive leader upset a fifty-year long trend in shifting party-ideologies?

I'm not so sure he ran as a true centrist anymore than John McCain did. He definitely got help from an increasingly frustrated electorate, no?

 

[ebola?]

Regardless of how he ran (shrouded in vague but lofty rhetoric), his policies have been thoroughly moderate.

ebola

 

[hobhead]

forgive a progressive, liberal sort of fellow from the ranks of organised labor's retired mutts .
I skipped the posts on 2,3,4, and had to add this to the IQ discussion .
G.W. Bush could not even speak coherently much less form opinions that were rationally assembled .
Clinton was a Rhodes scholar . Obama has prodigious prowness . Nixon sucked flies off walls and had no dignity and a mediocre mind.

Progress in US foreign policy which is dearly needed is not going to come from hawks (conservative, regressive types).

the mantra of ''less government'' is sheer gibberish as how can there be less governance with an ever growing population ?

I have no answers and am trying to grind through oregon's voter info booklet . the proposed amendments and initiatives are fucking mind boggling .

I do know not to throw away my vote by going third party . I did that with McGovern and woe is me to this day .

long and short of this is conservatives that i have encountered throughout a long live have decidedly been at a loss intellectually to progressives . one man's observations .

 

[ebola?]

G.W. Bush could not even speak coherently much less form opinions that were rationally assembled .

IMO, Bush was a very nervous and poor speaker, but most of his apparent stupidity was a ruse, to appeal to the 'every man'. I am utterly disheartened that it actually worked on a bunch of people.

long and short of this is conservatives that i have encountered throughout a long live have decidedly been at a loss intellectually to progressives .

Odd. Many conservatives in the Portland metro area tend to hold a sort of right-libertarian bent, and thus greater intellectual coherence than at least I, a leftist elitist, would expect.

ebola

 

[Cyc]

I think the 'right' gets a lot of flack for failing to think relatively. They tend to see things in black or white, and their fast resolve paints them as stubborn and dense.

Big thinkers tend to explore many angles, and come to conclusions after much deliberation. This is why you see technical and scientific people falling to the left, and religious folk falling to the right. One takes critical thought, while the other takes simple adherence to long-held beliefs.

 

[Solide]

It's because your American two party system sucks and doesn't leave room for any differentiation between the several groups that make up the 'left and the 'right'. Thus you have a schizofrenic part like the Republicans with on the one hand extreme Libertarians who've got nothing but loathing for government intervention on private matters and other hand extreme Christian moralist who would LOVE cameras in each and every room in each and every household.

Okay, it's way more complicated than that example I just gave, but the gist of it is that 'liberals' are per se are not more intelligent than 'conservatives' but that the Republican party just attracts more dumbasses than the Democrats at this point.

(Also, Glenn Beck)

 

[SubDude]

I skipped the posts on 2,3,4, and had to add this to the IQ discussion.
G.W. Bush could not even speak coherently much less form opinions that were rationally assembled .
.

I don't know of any stupid idiots who have become president of the US. After they are elected and it's time to actually govern... most have made bad decisions, regardless of their IQ. The last time I looked a high IQ wasn't a prerequsite for the presidency.

 

[Kenickie]

perhaps that's a problem.

 

[Wyld 4 X]

perhaps that's a problem.

It would help explain California's current situation.

 

[CoffeeDrinker]

What's a problem is the fact that campaigns are fronts for an ever continuing money laundering scheme and the idea of "campaign finance reform" gets paid moderate lip service before the election and then promptly ignored after.
Didn't Obama talk about it?
What happened to it?
Our system is necessarily corrupt until that changes.
I live in NY and we have one of the most dysfunctional and ineffectual State Assemblies and State Senates in the country.
The argument for small government gets constantly fed by the fact that the government we have really is a few shades less than totally incompetent.
I'm totally for effective and necessary regulations of most industries and institutions, but it's hard to argue against someone wanting to have less useless bureaucracy.


EDIT: This has nothing to do with the topic at hand doesn't it?

 

[qwe]

it's on topic

cenk's been ranting for months or longer about how they talk about campaign finance reform a bit every once in a while but never do anything. it's one of his central issues because if a politician is "bought" they no longer represent the people

bribes are one thing... but what happens is more subtle. the better they play ball with corporations, the higher their absurdly cozy job will be once they resign from office. not to mention the switching back and forth between corporations and lobbyist positions. it's fucking insane that we allow all this to happen to our government and consequently lose our voice

 

[ebola?]

Hah...but historically, presidents have tested at genius levels.

 

[qwe]

i think that the ruling class actually *was* "superior" to their subjects, historically... simply due to the fact that education, culture, art, religion, government... all of these things were centered around the aristocracy (or whatever ruling class existed)

some of this lingers to this day, but usually gets labelled elitism if brought up in discussion

 

[qwe]

about campaign finance reform... cenk wants to talk to conservatives and liberals alike. speaking from msnbc

http://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/14/LHykDEElIjg

 

[CharlesTheHammer]

Couldnt disagree more! Libs arent all geniuses!

Conservatives have faith and gut feelings. Liberals have logic and evidence. That's a generalization, and not always true, but in my experience, it usually is. That is what the two groups (usually) base their ideas on.

Imagine that two people are confronted with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.

The conservative will usually stick to their guns, and automatically assume that the evidence must be wrong in some way. Because they have faith in their ideas. They are sure that they are right.

The liberals have a number of strategies for dealing with this. Like thinking of an alternative explanation that's consistent with liberal beliefs, looking for different evidence, etc. But if those things don't work, they might abandon the belief. Because they are open to the possibility that they might be wrong.

The difference is doubt. Liberals have more doubt about their ideas than conservatives do. Doubt makes you more open minded, and more intellectually curious. And open-mindedness and curiosity lead to increased intelligence.

Maybe that is why.

Edit: I might have got that backwards. It's possible that intelligence leads to doubt, open-mindedness and curiosity. Not the other way around. It's kind of a chicken or egg question...
But why are they connected, and how does the connection explain why liberals are more intelligent? Because liberalism is a novel idea, and intelligent people are more likely to adopt novel ideas?

I am a moderate, not a conservative. Actually, by the strict Webster's definition of the word "Liberal", I am probably a liberal. But today's 'left' do not fit into the definition of the word 'liberal'. Hillary even made that clear in '08, when she was asked whether she was a liberal. She gave a basic definition of the word 'liberal', then said "no, we call ourselves Progressives these days".
So, I am not a Progressive, as I dont believe in a lot of the current radical Progressive beliefs. Sure, I believe in the environment, gay marriage, abortion, etc., but I dont believe that: A. America is a rotten, racist, oppressive, stupid, evil empire. B. I dont praise radical left wing zealots like Noam Chomsky, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, George Soros, Michael Moore, Che Gueverra, Fidel Castro, Chairman Mao, Hugo Chavez, etc., C. I dont use the race card as a political weapon, because I realize that it doesn't help anyone, and it hurts blacks in the long run. D. I think things through, instead of simply swallowing ridiculous left wing propaganda hook-line-and sinker, then getting all emotional, and basing my decisions solely on emotion. E. I debate people, instead of simply trying to smear and destroy anyone who disagrees with me. F. I dont believe that Latino illegal immigrants should be able to break our laws, and get away with it just because they are Latinos. G. I dont call everyone a racist who believes that Latinos should follow our laws like everyone else. H. I believe in EQUAL RIGHTS for everyone, just like Martin Luther King Jr did., and I dont call everyone a racist who also believe in equal rights, but dont believe in Affirmative action(ie. discrimination). I. I dont think we should lash out and hate ALL businesses, and 'punish' them by coming up with unrealistic, unfair taxes and regulations that force them to leave the country(which is possible thanks to NAFTA and the trade agreement with China that has caused millions and millions of US jobs to go overseas, thanks Bill Clinton!) J. I hold both political parties accountable, instead of blaming one party(R) for everything(regardless if they are responsible or not) and giving a complete pass to the other political party(D). K. I don't believe in repealing the 1st amendment rights of conservative talk show hosts on A.M. radio, and Fox news just because I disagree with them. L. I don't CONSTANTLY insult people who I politically disagree with M. I don't think that leading minorities into lifelong(or generations long) dependency on government is a good thing for them or society, as 'an idle mind and body is the devil's playground' (you get the point) N. I don't think that a 1 party, Democrat monopoly on power, without accountability is a good idea. O. I don't want to repeal the 2nd amendment, just because some people have been brainwashed into hating guns, as it is painfully obvious to those that actually look at it from an open mind, that doing so would not stop violence or murders

I could finish the alphabet, but I gotta go to bed, cause 'I' gotta work to pay taxes for all those future liberal entitlement programs for the lazy.

People aren't intelligent just because they say so, or just because they join up with the left. Intelligence is proven through actions, not claims, and Ive seen a lot of not-so-intelligent actions from a whole lot of leftists over the years, so I'm not buying the "we are all geniuses, are everyone else is stupid" mantra of the left.

 

[Droppersneck]

Conservatives have faith and gut feelings. Liberals have logic and evidence. That's a generalization, and not always true, but in my experience, it usually is. That is what the two groups (usually) base their ideas on.

Imagine that two people are confronted with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.

The conservative will usually stick to their guns, and automatically assume that the evidence must be wrong in some way. Because they have faith in their ideas. They are sure that they are right.

The liberals have a number of strategies for dealing with this. Like thinking of an alternative explanation that's consistent with liberal beliefs, looking for different evidence, etc. But if those things don't work, they might abandon the belief. Because they are open to the possibility that they might be wrong.

The difference is doubt. Liberals have more doubt about their ideas than conservatives do. Doubt makes you more open minded, and more intellectually curious. And open-mindedness and curiosity lead to increased intelligence.

Maybe that is why.

Edit: I might have got that backwards. It's possible that intelligence leads to doubt, open-mindedness and curiosity. Not the other way around. It's kind of a chicken or egg question...
But why are they connected, and how does the connection explain why liberals are more intelligent? Because liberalism is a novel idea, and intelligent people are more likely to adopt novel ideas?

lMAO. GTFO Liberals have emotion and irrational feelings that make them feel they need to accommodate everything b/c god forsake someone be uncomfortable. Conservatives have the logic but are often closed minded b/c of their stern beliefs/religious BS.

 

[Antavio09]

intelligence is a way of comparatively looking down on other people. liberal or conservative both can be smart and both can be dum this post is flawed for the simple fact that anyone commenting on your statement is going to have had different experiences with each mindset. My guess is the poster is looking for a Pejorative effect to the mindset of someone ideologically opposed to him. I love these types of threads.

 

[Droppersneck]

intelligence is a way of comparatively looking down on other people. liberal or conservative both can be smart and both can be dum this post is flawed for the simple fact that anyone commenting on your statement is going to have had different experiences with each mindset. My guess is the poster is looking for a Pejorative effect to the mindset of someone ideologically opposed to him. I love these types of threads.

So in layman's terms you are saying the person that started this thread is a troll?