• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Why Liberals Are More Intelligent Than Conservatives

Status
Not open for further replies.
Since I tend to lean right... I'm not sure I understand this, but it seems like their kinda confirming the thread topic??
yeah. this is one of the studies i was thinking about when making the thread. there's a statistical difference among conservatives and liberals in regards to openness--aka whether one leaves his comfort zones, dislikes the unknown, is open to new or weird information, tolerance and open mindedness, etc
 
Most conservatives are very concerned with ongoing govt intrusion and control of our lives... we don't need anymore expansion of govt. Liberals complain about conservatives trying to "impose their morality" on others, it is liberals who consistently argue for expanded powers of government over people's lives, which ultimately result in liberals "imposing their morality" on the rest of us. And if you can't be prodded or incentivised to act the way liberals want you to, eventually you'll be compelled by law to do so.
 
p/a = per annual?

subdude -- that's what i don't get about "conservatives". they say stay the fuck out of my shit, unless you want an abortion, then let me put laws and restrictions all over YOUR body, etc etc.

conservatives are fine letting you do whatever you want, as long as it fits into their ideas of what you should do, basically as long as you behave as a good, god fearing, christian. the conservative movement is going to sink unless they can divorce themselves from the radical right base. which sadly, i believe is impossible. chrisitans are the right wingers college students -- they do all the major foot work.

eta: i also see no problem with what liberals are trying to 'impose, morally" on "us." protection from racists in the work place? being able to marry whoever i want, regardless of skin colour (you know 50 years ago my relationship would have been illegal -- and i'm in a heterosexual one), sex, gender, whatever, being treated equally as a man in terms of pay (not yet), etc? I think the real fear here is change of status quo, which people just have to buck up and accept. America is not a white, chrisitan, male country anymore.
 
Last edited:
Most conservatives are very concerned with ongoing govt intrusion and control of our lives... we don't need anymore expansion of govt. Liberals complain about conservatives trying to "impose their morality" on others, it is liberals who consistently argue for expanded powers of government over people's lives, which ultimately result in liberals "imposing their morality" on the rest of us. And if you can't be prodded or incentivised to act the way liberals want you to, eventually you'll be compelled by law to do so.
which side wants to directly influence gay lives (who wants to fight for their country) to arrange their entire lifestyle so that they don't "come out"?

which side wants to deny certain people marriage?

which side supports laws (on the books or extinct) regulating what we do in our bedrooms?

which side talks about "social order" and sends funds to the military industrial complex (controlling plenty of lives.. if only for a minute of agony as the roof comes crashing down on him, it's still controlling those last few minutes of his life :)) and police? (this is bluelight, i don't feel like i have to go into that)

which side wants to control things that are immoral because they are too pleasurable? prohibition?

---

both sides have rhetoric against this, and both sides have politicians that stand against this. from what i can tell, ron paul is the only consistent one on the repub side. and IME, any actual progressive in the media will have a huge rant to go on about any of these issues

liberals are the ones who actually want government out of our daily lives. where do we want to spend the money and "increase gov size"? construction, jobs, public services, etc. that's not interfering with our lives as much as it is offering us a tool we can use to improve our lives

progressives will often tax fatty foods and cigarettes, but we don't usually send the police and military to control people. i personally disagree with these taxes, if we want to direct our behavior we should do it socially

http://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/15/3kh2R9wMtAI
 
Most conservatives are very concerned with ongoing govt intrusion and control of our lives...

I think those are libertarians, not conservatives.

Conservatives are for government intrusion they agree with. For example, take the question if government should intrude on drug sales, or prostitution. Conservatives want government to intrude and control that part of life. Libertarians don't.

Or another example -- conservatives seem to think that government should control who gets married, and are perfectly okay (as a general rule) with government telling some consenting adults that they can't marry. Libertarians tend to think government should have a more hands-off approach to government control of marriage.
 
it'd be nice if a conservative that doesn't watch fox news shows up

no offense, subdude. only offense to your sources of information

and yes, i do recognize that my sources of information are also biased, and everything could be flipped (cenk says republicans are running themselves off a cliff; limbaugh says democrats are running themselves off a cliff)
 
Conservatives are for government intrusion they agree with. For example, take the question if government should intrude on drug sales, or prostitution. Conservatives want government to intrude and control that part of life. Libertarians don't.

This.

It kills me to see the suits on CNBC grousing about big government and deficits and the demonization of Wall Street and wealth, because I remember the day TARP passed--you never saw more pearly whites in your life.

Screw these guys, really.
 
liberal and conservative are shitty terms. I've got handcuffs on my belt, but I support legalization of substances. Epalluettes on my shoulders, but I'm against minimum mandatorys.

political views are more then left to right.
 
Since when has law enforcement been partisan? You're meant to enforce the law, not express political viewpoints (and by that I mean your cuffs and your shoulder badge, not you personally here on BL or anything)

Anyway. A glaring example of Republican idiocy

http://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/3/l2Wz3fXZebE

America is going to be royally fucked up if it follows the GOP down the rabbit hole, and that's the mainstream GOP before the stark, raving mad 'insurgents' began taking over the party. I shudder at where America is headed. At least in Aus we've got a shit load of minerals, we can always hitch our horse to China as the world waves good bye to American preeminence.
 
it'd be nice if a conservative that doesn't watch fox news shows up

no offense, subdude. only offense to your sources of information

and yes, i do recognize that my sources of information are also biased, and everything could be flipped (cenk says republicans are running themselves off a cliff; limbaugh says democrats are running themselves off a cliff)

How about those who watch Fox [along with CBS, MSNBC, CNN... etc] to offset and get another slant from what they see elsewhere?? I think we have very little bias free TV or online news these days. BTW, I record ABC nightly news with diane each weekday.

Hey I've taken a lot of flack from you guys so I'm gonna to lay [most of] my cards on the table. I'm not totally consistant in my beliefs but damn close... Forget conservative vs liberal. I'm probably closer to libertarian than conservative?? Here are things important to me... I understand there's overlap in a few and they aren't listed in sequence of importance.:

*I'm against granting unconditional amnesty for 20 million illegals.

*I'm for the rights of individuals [adults] to consume anything they choose [including drugs] as long as the consumption doesn't harm, influence,[or potentially] injure another. I hope and prefer my choice to use anything considered unhealthy... doesn't influence others to do the same, especially kids and young adults.

*I'm against all laws which would jail an individual for buying or using drugs.

*I beleive in ALL free speech including [non required] teacher-lead prayer in classrooms and school sponsored events.

*I believe the government should be kept out of the matter of abortion, leaving the question to each person for their own consideration. No taxpayer-funded abortions

*I support all rights to private property and protection of my own property.

*I'm for equal civil rights for all individuals regardless of race, age, religion...etc

*I'm against "affirmative action" or any kind of govt intervention or assumption one group should have an advantage or better access to anything over another.

*I'm against govt subsidies to business, labor, or any special interest... govt should not have power to progrssively tax [individuals] or business for purpose of income redistribution.

*I'm against total dependence on govt to protect me from criminals. I have a right to carry and use a firearm for defense of my family and self.

*I don't believe govt should have power to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade.

*I believe the govt should "butt out" of our childrens educational process. Schools should be managed locally. Power should be returned to parents to direct the education of their children, without govt intervention. Parents should have control of all funds spent for their children's education.

*I don't believe in Social Security and it should be phased out. It's up to the individual and family to secure their own future.

*I beleive in ongoing and consistant govt reduction for aid to the poor. All charity/social assistance should eventually come from private groups like Red Cross/Salv Army/UnitedWay,corporations,churches/Synagogues/Mosques...etc, and individuals. Americans will become more compasionate and caring when they are free to choose where and how much they give. It's human nature for most people to accept responsibility for helping others... and they will do it more when not forced too.


==============

It's interesting Ron Paul is mentioned in this thread since kentucky borders the state where I curently live and wish someone with similar values was running for senate here. My views differ little from his.

OK... I'm out there now so take your best shit... I mean shot.

The only thing I ask... is rather than [or before] criticizing, have the courtsey to do the same as I did. It shouldn't take much since many of you believe the opposite as me on most issues. Mods.. if this is off topic, and important enough, start a new thread.
 
It's really quite simple, Republicans are dumb as posts and that obviously carries through to the results of the study. It's got nothing to with with being smug, rather the inherent liberal-bias of reality.

Hmm...interesting...

obama-umbrella-3001.jpg
 
*I'm against "affirmative action" or any kind of govt intervention or assumption one group should have an advantage or better access to anything over another.

I'm against affirmative action based on race.

I'm not against the government saying "hmmmm, this socioeconomic group in this area is underperforming, lets try to target them with programs to encourage more financially successful individuals".
 
I view the conclusions of this study (via popular press reporting thereof) as fatally flawed.

First, look at the categories that they used and according relevant contrasts. Near the likely mean are "conservative" and "middle of the road", with overlapping error bars, indicating that the population intelligences for these categories are likely the same. These two positions correspond to the two major parties, roughly (no, dems are not 'socialists' ;)). So we need to instead explain what's going on in the extreme categories, rather than point to a general linear trend.

Sidanius (1985) argued that political extremists, left and right, tend to reason with greater cognitive complexity and tolerance for ambiguity. Basically, extremists need think through political theory to establish their views, often coming under fire for said views, while moderates don't.

So why are those "very conservative" so seemingly dumb? Sidanius argued that most political inventories conflate xenophobia and ethnic chauvinism with conservatism. The former two correlate with lacking nuance in thought (ibid). S' found economic extreme-rightists to perform quite well in reasoning.

And, finally, I don't think that the causal mechanism at play here is at all direct. Rather, I think that cultural and economic conditions of upbringing influence both performance on IQ tests and influence reasoning prowess in various domains. For example, Bourdieu makes a compelling argument for how class-conditioning engenders intelligensia-elite extremism and lower-class populist conservatism.

ebola
 
And, finally, I don't think that the causal mechanism at play here is at all direct. Rather, I think that cultural and economic conditions of upbringing influence both performance on IQ tests and influence reasoning prowess in various domains. For example, Bourdieu makes a compelling argument for how class-conditioning engenders intelligensia-elite extremism and lower-class populist conservatism.

There was a social critic who recently wrote (astutely, IMHO) that the working classes raise their children to obey and conform, while the middle and upper classes raise their children to think and push boundaries, and that both of these classes are giving their children the respective mindsets they'll need to survive in the sorts of job environments they'll likely find themselves. Was Bourdieu this guy?
 
re:ebola,
many conservatives and moderate conservatives have a tendency to think close mindedly (xenophobic etc), you admitted. and that's what the original study was getting at, right? so the conclusions are not fatally flawed according to your own logic
 
Last edited:
*I'm for the rights of individuals [adults] to consume anything they choose [including drugs] as long as the consumption doesn't harm, influence,[or potentially] injure another. I hope and prefer my choice to use anything considered unhealthy... doesn't influence others to do the same, especially kids and young adults.

okay, good

*I'm against all laws which would jail an individual for buying or using drugs.

okay, good

*I beleive in ALL free speech including [non required] teacher-lead prayer in classrooms and school sponsored events.

okay, mediumgood

*I believe the government should be kept out of the matter of abortion, leaving the question to each person for their own consideration. No taxpayer-funded abortions

okay, ignorant but well meant

*I support all rights to private property and protection of my own property.

you're arguing with the wrong pirates, mate

*I'm for equal civil rights for all individuals regardless of race, age, religion...etc

okay, mandatory political statement heard

*I'm against "affirmative action" or any kind of govt intervention or assumption one group should have an advantage or better access to anything over another.

okay, ignorant but well meant (escher's waterfall got this)

*I'm against govt subsidies to business, labor, or any special interest... govt should not have power to progrssively tax [individuals] or business for purpose of income redistribution.

okay, idealistic and dumb but part of a larger reasoned framework

*I'm against total dependence on govt to protect me from criminals. I have a right to carry and use a firearm for defense of my family and self.

okay, idealistic and dumb but part of a larger reasoned framework

*I don't believe govt should have power to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade.

okay, idealistic and dumb but part of a larger reasoned framework

*I believe the govt should "butt out" of our childrens educational process. Schools should be managed locally. Power should be returned to parents to direct the education of their children, without govt intervention. Parents should have control of all funds spent for their children's education.

it depends on the particular issue. it is a good thing to have certain things centralized. our system's failure at centralization is when rich kids have books and poor kids don't, for which there is no excuse

*I don't believe in Social Security and it should be phased out. It's up to the individual and family to secure their own future.

the individual does not always get enough fair breaks to stay above water, especially in the type of nation you'd like. the family is a social unit that may not be stable for the long term future, things are changing faster and faster. conservatives really gotta get with reality :P

*I beleive in ongoing and consistant govt reduction for aid to the poor. All charity/social assistance should eventually come from private groups like Red Cross/Salv Army/UnitedWay,corporations,churches/Synagogues/Mosques...etc, and individuals. Americans will become more compasionate and caring when they are free to choose where and how much they give. It's human nature for most people to accept responsibility for helping others... and they will do it more when not forced too.

LOL

-

overall grade*: 6.25 / 13, which is 48%. you fail at perception

evolution happens at different rates for different people, and since according to the above posts' reasoning you are one of the more "intellectual kind of conservative", i'll assume you are relatively win at perception compared to your peers. your grade will be adjusted in a way deemed appropriate by the bluelight supreme court

faxing them...

alright it seems you are eligible to pass, for now. you are on academic probation and your score is 48% + 10% noob bonus + 10% for trying. that's 68% which is a C+

:)

* "okay's" got a point each. half a point if okay but ignorant, a quarter point for slightly right or at least reasoned answer
 
Last edited:
evolution happens at different rates for different people, and since according to the above posts' reasoning you are one of the more "intellectual kind of conservative", i'll assume you are relatively win at perception compared to your peers. your grade will be adjusted in a way deemed appropriate by the bluelight supreme court

Wouldn't that be some sort of affirmative action that the poster in question opposes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top