Society/Culture Why do less intelligent people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology.

[Mofra]

The Daily Mail article reports upon a study by Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario, Canada. (another Canadian Academic Psychologist but without a youtube presence). He looked at data from 2 UK studies testing child development. The subjects were
(a) 4,267 boys and 4,537 girls born in 1958;
(b) 3,412 boys and 3,658 girls born in 1970.

The tests were of
(c) verbal and non verbal intelligence; and
(d) cognitive abilities (number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words).

In both surveys, 23 years later, the same groups were asked to answer a series of questions about traditions, authority and attitudes toward other races. Hodson then postulated a definition of conservatism which is undefined but looks to be based upon attitudes towards Authority and other races and concluded that low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservtive ideologies.

I’d very cautious about accepting the conclusions drawn by Grin and his gaggle of applauders from the article helpfully posted by Mofra

So would I.

Here's a meta-analysis that's far more wide ranging.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/55893129.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiZksKNiq38AhWmwjgGHVyFAdQQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2xHhvNmp4MW8yHxMsywA_c

There is a significant body of work on the subject. Assuming the entire concept is based off a single study is folly.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I don’t think it’s necessary to provide evidence. You have no standing in this court of public opinion.

Nor do you.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Nor do you.

We have a similar post count, but I have almost three times as many likes.

Probably just a coincidence.

 

[Carringbush2010]

We have a similar post count, but I have three times as many likes.

Probably just a coincidence.

Yet you still don't have standing in the court of public opinion.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Yet you still don't have standing in the court of public opinion.

I'm sitting down.

 

[ElectricG]

We have a similar post count, but I have almost three times as many likes.

Probably just a coincidence.

Ghosty’s kind of a big deal around here

 

[Seeds]

Let me make it simple for you.

Generally speaking, those on lower incomes are doing it tougher than those on higher incomes. It's actually common sense. 87% of people are now better off. Amazingly this coincides with the lowest 87% of income earners. Crazy I know, and I get that you Tories struggle with these things but that's ok, I'm here to help.

Had Albanese passed on extra tax cuts to the poor whilst keeping those for the rich he'd have been accused of overspending because of Laybah...thus providing further evidence that it's not good enough for those on the right to win, but everybody else has to lose in the process.

So struggling is just a definition of relativity and defines nothing objective?

if all people are equal and poor then no one is struggling but if some are rich and others are less rich then the less rich are struggling?

surely you have a different definition in mind? This cant be solely it.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'm sitting down.

"I can't stand it, I know ya planned it, telling y'all it's sabotage "

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

So struggling is just a definition of relativity and defines nothing objective?

if all people are equal and poor then no one is struggling but if some are rich and others are less rich then the less rich are struggling?

surely you have a different definition in mind? This cant be solely it.

No, I think I’ll stick with what I said.

 

[Seeds]

No, I think I’ll stick with what I said.

i was quoting back my exact interpretation of what you said. If Ive misread it or you didnt explain it properly please correct me.

also please dont call me a Tory. one im not from britain. 2. I vote Labor more often then not. 3. Ive voted for the greens more then Ive voted for the Libs.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

i was quoting back my exact interpretation of what you said. If Ive misread it or you didnt explain it properly please correct me.

also please dont call me a Tory. one im not from britain. 2. I vote Labor more often then not. 3. Ive voted for the greens more then Ive voted for the Libs.

My point, and this is the last time I will make it as this has been done to death is that whether of not there was a promise broken the proposed tax cuts amounted to nothing more than trickle down economics. They benefited the more affluent members of society. That is a fact and no amount of mental gymnastics or word salad can dispute this.

If your issue is the broken promise the just come out and say that. I know you to be better than falling into the trap that so many "conservatives" have set that goes along the line that "$200k is not rich these days, give me my money, blah, blah, blah." Well $200k is a lot more than the average salary so people who trot that out can go and cry to someone else because IDGAF about their salty tears. Common sense tells you that people on less money do it tougher than people on more so spare me this sort of nonsense:

So struggling is just a definition of relativity and defines nothing objective?

The proposed tax cuts were patently unfair. In the interests of disclosure I would have been financially better off had the ALP not changed them. But some of us can see the bigger picture. As for the broken promise well again IDGAF, all pollies break promises and if this is the hill that Dutton wants to die on then it going to be a rather gruesome political demise for him. 87% of people are better off with the changes and as for the other 13% (where I sit) then frankly, f*** them. There's more than enough opportunity for people with higher incomes to (legally) rort the tax system and claw that money back.

As to calling you a "Tory" well Tory is something of a catch-all phrase to describe the right wing in the British Empire (of which we are sadly still a part) these days, despite its origins. The term has been used by politicians here so I am not sure why you are offended by that. You certainly post like one but I will take at face value your comment about which way you lean politically and refrain from directing that term at you in future.

 

[ElectricG]

I agree with the changes but is it that hard to concede the point that politicians should try to be true to their word?

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

I agree with the changes but is it that hard to concede the point that politicians should try to be true to their word?

Ordinarily yes but sometimes these things cannot be avoided.

I'd prefer my decision makers be free to change their minds as the facts change. Unfortunately we live in an era of wedge politics that is driven by the right wing media.

This carry on about the broken promise is a red-herring. The changes are good, sensible policy in the current economic environment.

 

[Cap]

Do we know if less intelligent people lack a sense of humour?

There has to be a connection to Babalyon Bee, conservatism and stupidity?

 

[ElectricG]

Do we know if less intelligent people lack a sense of humour?

There has to be a connection to Babalyon Bee, conservatism and stupidity?

Tbf betoota advocate isn’t much better. “Local man is a hypocrite about a thing” got lame after about 2 weeks

 

[Cap]

Tbf betoota advocate isn’t much better. “Local man is a hypocrite about a thing” got lame after about 2 weeks

I'm always confused by the Betoota.

I find it really like hit and miss but I can't see a specific target.(edit - maybe boomers ?)

Really didn't like the podcast either.

 

[mcnulty]

Given the increasingly vociferous extremes on both sides, satire is becoming superfluous. They are their own satire.

 

[Cap]

Given the increasingly vociferous extremes on both sides, satire is becoming superfluous. They are their own satire.

Which one?

 

[mcnulty]

Which one?

What I mean is, in our current political age, parody and genuine belief are becoming indistinguishable.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Given the increasingly vociferous extremes on both sides, satire is becoming superfluous. They are their own satire.

A Fast Forward reboot is called for, rubbery figures and all.

 

[Blue1980]

Benefiting low income earners doesn't necessarily serve the interests of the majority.

The majority put the ALP into office on the basis of their promised stage 3 tax cuts, amongst other things they promised. I presume you'd be up in arms if the ALP promised funding to public schools and/or hospitals at election time then reneged.

Again what they are doing does benefit the majority, so your point is moot.

It still benefits higher earners too! Just not to as great an extent as it previously was going to.

As I’ve said I’m sure most people up in arms about this it doesn’t effect at all. It’s like people who just want to identify as earning over 200k a year, rather than actually earning that much.

 

[Blue1980]

Stack the joint with as many centralists and numerologists as possible.

There is no such thing as a centrist. As it would be judged being halfway between the 2 major parties which does change over time, so centre to what?

 

[Blue1980]

Problem is, half the country believes the anti-science politicians and their compliant media.

These people are more worried about which supermarket sells plastic flags ffs

So yes believing in science is somehow a left wing thing as the right just go more for feels.

 

[ElectricG]

There is no such thing as a centrist. As it would be judged being halfway between the 2 major parties which does change over time, so centre to what?

It means playing devils advocate and derailing discussion all the time for no reason.

In all seriousness I think it means more that either:

• the person has a mix of conservative and progressive views, and therefore that person averages out to somewhere in the middle; or
• they believe the left and the right both need to moderate their beliefs towards the centre, but don’t fully reject either philosophy

 

[Blue1980]

I agree with the changes but is it that hard to concede the point that politicians should try to be true to their word?

Well they did do 85-90% of what the initial plan was.

If that’s the worst crime of the current ALP govt in terms of broken promises they are doing better than any govt of recent memory.

My main criticism of them would be their tacit support of Israel, but I do begrudgingly understand America and the Israel lobby has us by the balls.

Also Dutton seems to want Israel to nuke Gaza.

 

[Blue1980]

It means playing devils advocate and derailing discussion all the time for no reason.

In all seriousness I think it means more that either:

• the person has a mix of conservative and progressive views, and therefore that person averages out to somewhere in the middle; or
• they believe the left and the right both need to moderate their beliefs towards the centre, but don’t fully reject either philosophy

I think literally any intelligent person should be able to call out anything and criticise any policy.

Again middle is relative, where is this middle? Is it between ALP and LNP, greens and one nation?

If one side says we should commit genocide in Palestine and the other doesn’t, does that mean a centrist wants half genocide?

I just often see centrists as douchy smug ill informed apathetic morons who somehow think they are above the frey and too cool to care about things.