Society/Culture Do less intelligent people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology?

[Grin]

This is a thread created for our resident right wing posters, you know, the ones who insist they're Centralists.

In a similarly titled thread some of you whinged bitterly (as you do, all the time) that you weren't permitted to derail it by debating a different topic. You passionately wanted to debate if, not why, less intelligent people trend right. You voiced deep frustration at unbearable discrimination from moderators who prevented you from doing so. But, despite being invited many times, you've apparently been incapable of creating a thread to debate your preferred topic.

Given your mantra "can't someone else do it?" and my feelings of empathy and sympathy for the terrible injustices you face every minute of every day, I mean Jesus! now people are even trying to stop you voicing your protestations at ungodly goings on in our local councils, I thought I'd do this little favour for you.

Let me kick things off with this quote from 150 odd years ago:

“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives...​

I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. Suppose any party, in addition to whatever share it may possess of the ability of the community, has nearly the whole of its stupidity, that party must, by the law of its constitution, be the stupidest party; and I do not see why honorable gentlemen should see that position as at all offensive to them, for it ensures their being always an extremely powerful party . . . There is so much dense, solid force in sheer stupidity, that any body of able men with that force pressing behind them may ensure victory in many a struggle, and many a victory the Conservative party has gained through that power."​

John Stuart Mill ( British philosopher, economist, and liberal member of Parliament for Westminster from 1865 to 68 )​

I thought dumb f*cks voting right/conservative might be a recent phenomenon, that the side of politics more effective at appealing to your ignorance, fears, bigotries, meanness and general peaheartedness might change over time. Seems I was wrong if this quote is true. You've been trending conservative for at least centuries.

One interesting thing that the quote highlights is a modern day paradox in Australia. Those who gain your vote should be most powerful because there are so many of you. Think Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison. However, in the past 12 months, your strength has weakened considerably as almost everyone who isn't intellectually challenged, completely gullible, or is in anyway even slightly empathetic, have abandoned your party of choice (I acknowledge that many of you will preference even more conservative candidates before the "centralist" Peter Dutton Liberal party). So it makes sense that Murdoch has instructed Peter and Barnaby et. al. to double down on their righteous and godly war on woke, to make sure they capture the vote of every *ing idiot in the country and thus regain majority rule

Anyway my right wing/conservative fellow Big Footy posters, this one's for you
Others are welcome to contribute. Have at it.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

With an OP so conducive to friendly and reasonable discussion, I see this going well.

 

[Cap]

With an OP so conducive to friendly and reasonable discussion, I see this going well.

So that's a yes ?

 

[Big Papa Ted]

So that's a yes ?

I honestly have no idea. From my experience there are stupid & intelligent people on both sides of the spectrum.

I suppose the point is, who cares? Like if it is true. Ok...so what? Unless it's being used as part of a wider framework on how to better sway people to support better policy/make society better; what's the point?

I mean, this thread was made for the sole reason of taking swipes at people you don't agree with. Why? This attempt at point scoring is kind of meaningless, and makes the OP kind of look like an a**hole tbh.

 

[Gethelred]

Over to you two, ElectricG and Carringbush2010!

I look forward to your spirited defense of your fellow humans!

 

[Gethelred]

I suppose the point is, who cares?

Take a look at the first few pages of the other thread, and you'll see more than a few.

Like if it is true. Ok...so what?

The consequences of an entire field of political thought deliberately pandering to the lowest common denominator are worthy of contemplation, no?

Unless it's being used as part of a wider framework on how to better sway people to support better policy/make society better; what's the point?

If the point of progressive political discourse is progress - and I'd argue it is - then it's worth considering what we can do to attract these people, or even if trying to attract them at all is a worthwhile pursuit, what doing so would mean. It might be that to attract the stupid/gulliable, we would have to take on some of the aspects of the right, namely the desire to simplify to a pure binary, the need to depict the other as evil.

Is it worth sacrificing some of your worldview to win?

There's also the reality that you are not compelled to post in here if this thread is not for you. It absolutely is for others, those people who spent pages whinging in the first thread.

 

[evolved2]

Over to you two, ElectricG and Carringbush2010!

I look forward to your spirited defense of your fellow humans!

Where's my invite?

 

[Cap]

I honestly have no idea. From my experience there are stupid & intelligent people on both sides of the spectrum.

I suppose the point is, who cares? Like if it is true. Ok...so what? Unless it's being used as part of a wider framework on how to better sway people to support better policy/make society better; what's the point?

I mean, this thread was made for the sole reason of taking swipes at people you don't agree with. Why? This attempt at point scoring is kind of meaningless, and makes the OP kind of look like an a**hole tbh.

I think if we look across the Western World, our problems aren't being caused by populist Left Wing politicians tailoring their messages to people which usually includes misinformation, anti intellectualism, conspiracy theories and just plain old lies.

Seems like something we need to understand. Scott Morrison is as close to a Trump I want in Australia.

But in all seriousness, how to we get through to MAGA supporters that live in Australia, that's a special type of stupid and I want to know as a society how we failed them to the point they fell for that grifter?

 

[Big Papa Ted]

Take a look at the first few pages of the other thread, and you'll see more than a few.

I was moreso saying "why do people care?", not "do people actually care about this?". But appreciate that it could be easily interpreted differently in the context I wrote it.

The consequences of an entire field of political thought deliberately pandering to the lowest common denominator are worthy of contemplation, no?

If the point of progressive political discourse is progress - and I'd argue it is - then it's worth considering what we can do to attract these people, or even if trying to attract them at all is a worthwhile pursuit, what doing so would mean. It might be that to attract the stupid/gulliable, we would have to take on some of the aspects of the right, namely the desire to simplify to a pure binary, the need to depict the other as evil.

Is it worth sacrificing some of your worldview to win?

I don't disagree with anything you said, but is that really the premise of this thread? With an OP that's so antagonistic and dripping with venom, do you really think that's going to be the outcome of this thread? Moreso, does the OP make you think that this thread was started to encourage reasonable discourse? Or was it just done as an opportunity to sling mud and pointscore? I know which way I'm leaning.

There's also the reality that you are not compelled to post in here if this thread is not for you. It absolutely is for others, those people who spent pages whinging in the first thread.

Yeah I'm tracking I'm not required to post here, and if it is just mudslinging I'll avoid it dw. Was moreso pointing out that if you want to encourage reasonable discussion and potentially sway people's opinions, starting the discussion off in a way that makes you look like an arrogant, antagonistic c**t might not be the best way to go about it.

I think if we look across the Western World, our problems aren't being caused by populist Left Wing politicians tailoring their messages to people which usually includes misinformation, anti intellectualism, conspiracy theories and just plain old lies.

Seems like something we need to understand. Scott Morrison is as close to a Trump I want in Australia.

But in all seriousness, how to we get through to MAGA supporters that live in Australia, that's a special type of stupid and I want to know as a society how we failed them to the point they fell for that grifter?

For the italicised, I actually think it's a case of both (although it's far more prevalent on the right side, and from the left it's less politicians and more from others that influence the discourse).

For the bolded, that's a great question and hopefully that's what gets explored. Calling people "a special kind of stupid" probably isn't a great way to influence change though.

 

[kranky al]

Where's my invite?

Errr

Hes talking about you, not to you.

 

[Cap]

For the italicised, I actually think it's a case of both (although it's far more prevalent on the right side, and from the left it's less politicians and more from others that influence the discourse).

For the bolded, that's a great question and hopefully that's what gets explored. Calling people "a special kind of stupid" probably isn't a great way to influence change though.

I recall an obese RWNJ conspiracy theorist on the Crows board once telling me that the reason society has got to this point is Liberals let it happen...

And I agree. We've been too polite to people.

We've let 'that's your opinion' cover the sins of blatant mistruths and lies. We've assumed arguments in good faith, when there was none.

We need to call stupid for what it is and not hide behind offending people.

If you fell for Trump you are an idiot, still don't believe Climate Science, you are an idiot. Flat Earther, idiot. Think Covid vaccines aren't safe? Idiot.

(Yes it's tongue in cheek, but everything else have failed so why not give it a crack )

 

[Big Papa Ted]

I recall an obese RWNJ conspiracy theorist on the Crows board once telling me that the reason society has got to this point is Liberals let it happen...

And I agree. We've been too polite to people.

We've let 'that's your opinion' cover the sins of blatant mistruths and lies. We've assumed arguments in good faith, when there was none.

We need to call stupid for what it is and not hide behind offending people.

If you fell for Trump you are an idiot, still don't believe Climate Science, you are an idiot. Flat Earther, idiot. Think Covid vaccines aren't safe? Idiot.

(Yes it's tongue in cheek, but everything else have failed so why not give it a crack )

I mean you can take that approach, I just don't think it'll yield great results in shifting people's perspectives/getting them onside.

 

[Cap]

I mean you can take that approach, I just don't think it'll yield great results in shifting people's perspectives/getting them onside.

But we know it isn't going to change regardless of what people say.

So what's another reason ?

 

[royale with cheese]

“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives...​

I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. Suppose any party, in addition to whatever share it may possess of the ability of the community, has nearly the whole of its stupidity, that party must, by the law of its constitution, be the stupidest party; and I do not see why honorable gentlemen should see that position as at all offensive to them, for it ensures their being always an extremely powerful party . . . There is so much dense, solid force in sheer stupidity, that any body of able men with that force pressing behind them may ensure victory in many a struggle, and many a victory the Conservative party has gained through that power."​

John Stuart Mill ( British philosopher, economist, and liberal member of Parliament for Westminster from 1865 to 68 )​

This guy gives Sartre a run for his money in the looks department.

 

[kranky al]

I mean you can take that approach, I just don't think it'll yield great results in shifting people's perspectives/getting them onside.

Neither has arguing in good faith.

 

[Grin]

I mean you can take that approach, I just don't think it'll yield great results in shifting people's perspectives/getting them onside.

Come on mate. No amount of reason, science, logic etc is ever going to change the views of dense wing nuts, bigots, incels, christian Talliban, anti science conspiracy theorists, neo nazis, anti vaccers, people who still support the Liberal/National party etc. They only respond to fear campaigns, appeals to ignorance, irrational fears, bigotries and meanness. Weak minded people who's only intellectual strength is their unwavering comment to being stupid and gullible.
Even they know being a right-winger/conservative is undeniable prove of being a f*ckwit, which is why so many of them insist they're centrists or even liberals.
So rather than trying to reason with them, let's point and laugh at them.

Anyway, they desperately wanted debate if stupid people trend right/conservative rather than why, but apparently lacked the capability to create a thread, so, being the good bloke that I am, I've done it for the dumb f*cks.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

But we know it isn't going to change regardless of what people say.

So what's another reason ?

Come on mate. No amount of reason, science, logic etc is ever going to change the views of dense wing nuts, bigots, incels, christian Talliban, anti science conspiracy theorists, neo nazis, anti vaccers, people who still support the Liberal/National party etc. They only respond to fear campaigns, appeals to ignorance, irrational fears, bigotries and meanness. Weak minded people who's only intellectual strength is their unwavering comment to being stupid and gullible.
Even they know being a right-winger/conservative is undeniable prove of being a f*ckwit, which is why so many of them insist they're centrists or even liberals.
So rather than trying to reason with them, let's point and laugh at them.

Anyway, they desperately wanted debate if stupid people trend right/conservative rather than why, but apparently lacked the capability to create a thread, so, being the good bloke that I am, I've done it for the dumb f*cks.

I've seen plenty of people change their views over time, I mean just look at how public discourse has changed over treating certain groups in the last 20-30 years. And surely trying (even if you can only change the views of a few) is a better outcome then abusing these people and entrenching them into their views.

But let's assume you are right, and conservatives are really stupid and you won't be able to change their views. If that's the case, aren't you therefore just slagging off on people who are less intelligent than you? I believe the term is 'punching down'.

Either way, you're coming across like an arrogant f**king arsehole.

 

[Cap]

I've seen plenty of people change their views over time, I mean just look at how public discourse has changed over treating certain groups in the last 20-30 years. And surely trying (even if you can only change the views of a few) is a better outcome then abusing these people and entrenching them into their views.

But let's assume you are right, and conservatives are really stupid and you won't be able to change their views. If that's the case, aren't you therefore just slagging off on people who are less intelligent than you? I believe the term is 'punching down'.

Either way, you're coming across like an arrogant f**king arsehole.

I don't think all conservative thinkers are stupid, even the last thread was based on an article that implied that less intelligent people are likely to have socially conservative views.

If we look around the world, that seems pretty accurate. I mean Clarence Thomas,the dodgy US Supreme court Judge is clearly intelligent. Those who supported his views appear less so. But that's the appeal of being a right wing authoritarian leader isn't it, you appeal to socially conservative views, because you know the type of people who are likely going to fall for it.

But back to your point, you can call it abuse, or punching down. Or it's calling a spade a spade, I'm sure they would see it as woke for me to not point out their stupidity for fear of hurting their feelings?

Just to be clear it's not like it's the first choice , for instance we've have decades of conversations about climate change we've been polite, we given equal voice to an unequal debate, but the stupidity persists.

Not sure why you need the personal abuse, it's just a theoretical discussion. It's not like I'm going to start an anti woke stupid movement where I ban books of stupid or stop people talking about stupid topics or not allowing the history of stupid to be taught.

 

[Gethelred]

Either way, you're coming across like an arrogant f**king arsehole.

I think that's more or less the point: in the last thread, the people Grin is talking about couldn't line up fast enough to take umbrage or try and debate the thread premise, despite it being manifestly not what that thread was about. Then, you've got that the trolling that occurred in that thread was polite, genteel even, and they still didn't get it; they still kept biting.

There's an aspect of mask off going on here; if the last thread was a series of diplomatic niceties, this one's a battlefield.

So, coming across as an arrogant ******* a-hole (it's a-hole, unless you're a yank) comes with the territory. It's that the previous levels of disdain weren't sufficient to get the point across.

The time for subtlety or manners is past.

Edit: It's also a bit of a pisser that a r s e hole is filtered but arsehole is not.

Chief is unaustralian confirmed.

 

[the_interloper]

I think that's more or less the point: in the last thread, the people Grin is talking about couldn't line up fast enough to take umbrage or try and debate the thread premise, despite it being manifestly not what that thread was about. Then, you've got that the trolling that occurred in that thread was polite, genteel even, and they still didn't get it; they still kept biting.

There's an aspect of mask off going on here; if the last thread was a series of diplomatic niceties, this one's a battlefield.

So, coming across as an arrogant ******* a-hole (it's a-hole, unless you're a yank) comes with the territory. It's that the previous levels of disdain weren't sufficient to get the point across.

The time for subtlety or manners is past.

Edit: It's also a bit of a pisser that a r s e hole is filtered but arsehole is not.

Chief is unaustralian confirmed.

Hey you're dodging the swear filter, ban!

 

[Big Papa Ted]

I think that's more or less the point: in the last thread, the people Grin is talking about couldn't line up fast enough to take umbrage or try and debate the thread premise, despite it being manifestly not what that thread was about. Then, you've got that the trolling that occurred in that thread was polite, genteel even, and they still didn't get it; they still kept biting.

There's an aspect of mask off going on here; if the last thread was a series of diplomatic niceties, this one's a battlefield.

So, coming across as an arrogant ******* a-hole (it's a-hole, unless you're a yank) comes with the territory. It's that the previous levels of disdain weren't sufficient to get the point across.

The time for subtlety or manners is past.

Edit: It's also a bit of a pisser that a r s e hole is filtered but arsehole is not.

Chief is unaustralian confirmed.

Mate I'm gonna call bulls**t on the bolded. I just read through the first couple or pages and it was laced with venom from the start. So much so that you called it 'bait-y' in post 7.

There's also the fact that the entire premise of the thread was going to get people's bristles up. That people took that bait isn't a surprise.

My point stands WRT who I was initially responding to. If you're going to act like a conceited c**t, don't be surprised if people don't come round to your point of view

 

[evolved2]

Mate I'm gonna call bulls**t on the bolded. I just read through the first couple or pages and it was laced with venom from the start. So much so that you called it 'bait-y' in post 7.

There's also the fact that the entire premise of the thread was going to get people's bristles up. That people took that bait isn't a surprise.

My point stands WRT who I was initially responding to. If you're going to act like a conceited c**t, don't be surprised if people don't coke round to your point of view

Grin was almost certainly trolling. I'm convinced most other progressives who post there are being genuine, which shows how stupid they are.

Welcome to the SRP.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

Grin was almost certainly trolling. I'm convinced most other progressives who post there are being genuine, which shows how stupid they are.

Welcome to the SRP.

No offence man, but saying stuff like this doesn't paint you in a much better light.

 

[evolved2]

No offence man, but saying stuff like this doesn't paint you in a much better light.

Trolls troll.

 

[Grin]

There's also the fact that the entire premise of the thread was going to get people's bristles up. That people took that bait isn't a surprise.

The premise of that thread is undeniable fact, like global warming. If you want to debate the premise of the thread, this is the place to do it. Show evidence that that MAGAs are highly intelligent, critical thinkers with rational minds. Bet you can't.

But I agree with you that basic scientific facts do tend to be very triggering for for our intellectually challenged victims of various right wing/conservative cons, aimed at tricking the stupid Ito voting against their own interests.

Grin was almost certainly trolling. I'm convinced most other progressives who post there are being genuine, which shows how stupid they are.

Welcome to the SRP.

You say someone pointing out a blatantly obvious fact is trolling.
I say someone who's had a history regurgitating climate science denial rubbish is a dumb f*ck who's been conned by propaganda specifically aimed at conning dumb f*cks.

I don't agree with you. But do you agree with me?