For the most part. Judging anyone without knowing anything about them is a sign of lower intelligence.
Those who judge others before knowing anything about them will themselves be judged, &, I agree that this '...is a sign of lower intelligence...' There is something called the Golden Rule as spoken of in the Holy Bible: 'Do unto others as you would done unto you.' In other words, treat people the same way you wish to be treated.
The Bible isn't the only religious document to state the rule. Just about every single religion has some variation of the golden rule.
Sage Ashtavakra was having 8 deformities, when he walked into court of a king limping awkwardly courtiers laughed. he said king was supposed to be surrounded by wise men, but here only butchers and cobblers are present as I am being judged by my flesh and skin
In most cases, yes. However I've met well educated, intelligent people who have incredible "blind spots".
Absolutely!!! I have met some university students with BSc. degrees who work as cashiers in drugstores, and, I have met some truly brilliant trades people (e.g. Carpenters, mechanics, welders, etc.) who would put many of those with a post-secondary education to shame. Many of those who are racist and conservative come from traditional families who honestly believe in '...corporal punishment & capital punishment...' as a means to deal with young offenders and hardened criminals. However, I know from my own personal experience that the outdated notion, '...an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth...' does not guarantee safety and security. Instead, common sense and open communication will bring safety and security to our messed up world.
i dont totally disagree with you but i do believe that a rapist or a pedophilile put to death will guarantee safely and securely that they will not do it again
So would changing laws to keep them incarcerated for the rest of their natural lives. It would be cheaper, too.
thats right diewasseratte, it is cheaper to keep someone in prison....A lot cheaper. It is immoral to use death as a punishment....it isn't a punishment and it is not a deterrent.
over educated? Yeah, sure...your kind would be afraid of people who know too much. Intelligence is scary, that's why you people avoid it.
Atri - Not just the current administration but a whole lot of these self proclaimed Superior liberals.
ladyrhiannon824 - Anyone who doesn't know enough history to know that the KKK was populated by liberal democrats and that the liberal democrats fought the equal rights and desegregation can hardly call them selves intelligent or educated.
Keep reading Maple. She didn't even know who Louis Farrahkan was and when I told her she accused me of focusing on "scary foreigners." (I didn't know that an American borne person living in Chicago was a foreigner - but obviously the Lady lives by her own rules.)
Twyla, you assume too much, if you can't follow what I saw when I say it and cannot follow what I am referring to than I suggest you get on the bandwagon and stay silent. Maple....I am actually talking about now, today, you know.....where we live NOW. Political parties are not what they are today sweet heart. Andrew Jackson was the founder of the democratic party even though, by today's standards he would be a republican. You see, here is how the english language works....we make up words based off of other words and then we apply meaning to those words which can change over time because of new developments in societal and cultural structure and trends.....duh.
Racism, prejudice, and conservatism (I feel sure) is linked to a *lot* of things other than a person with a low IO. That's the problem with statistics; they set out to *enforce* a thought which is already set out and the quotas are bounced around to suit the question they are out to 'prove'. What they did *not* do in this study was to see what else the *same* people had in common. It could be that they loved to eat at Mc Donalds, preferred Coke to Pepsi and showered using shower gel.<br />
Indeed. After all, there's nothing like a classic "Hitler loved dogs" argument. Boy, am I sure convinced!
Hitler invented the third party study that used controversial plot points to prove his views. He was an excellent propagandist that way and could fool little minds into believing him. Likewise this study used the twisted logic that because people with lower IQ's are more likely to go to church and be racists, they they are therefore conservatives is also flawed.
What a bunch of leftwing loonsense!
I agree, lumping conservatives in with racism and prejudice is like lumping liberals in with serial killers.
I think it has a lot to do with upbringing and what you're exposed to. A very bright person could be a racist if they were raised to believe that and then were never taught any better.
Depends on your definitions,..but calling the low I.Q.card seems a bit condascending or judgemental in my opinion..Many studies are constructed around pre-determined agendas,.and are just academic hogwash..I think we also need a "common-sense quotient" with most things these days.
Satoshi Kanazawa, a social scientist at the London School of Economics, who did "your" study is pretty much discredited and a non intellectual himself. He also claims that low IQ in Ethiopians is the reason they have such poor health care!
huffington post is linked to low IQ's. It's been proven.
As a liberal leaning person, I love articles like that. As a fair and open minded person, I want to know the source. The Huffington Post is a self proclaimed liberal information source, so right bashing is suspect. I went to the article and it said that the accusation was a "a qualified yes." This says that statistically, there is a slight tendency for lower IQ people to be racist, prejudice, and conservative. I don't doubt that, but I also know that many very brilliant people are conservative. Morons didn't orchestrate the financial fraud that killed our economy, and then allowed them to walk away with huge bonuses from the U.S. Treasure. <br />
The more defining aspect from my experience, is the person's level of tolerance for change (liberal high - conservative low,) and their ability to feel compassion and empathy (again, liberal high - conservative low.)<br />
My two cents.
I like your cents
Financial fraud didn't "kill our economy." The mortgage bubble courtesy of government backed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and the derivatives market that happened not just under the nose of but with full approval of the federal regulators killed the economy. Evil can only do so much - to really screw things up takes a government .
The banks and wall street had the government kill the Glass–Steagall Act making their actions, which would have been criminal under the act, "legal." Most Americans consider what they did criminal. You can push the blame onto Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, but it was the banks and Wall Street that were writing bad loans, packaging the loans, and marketing them as top quality investments.
Actually I'll 100% disagree with that last line. They did not market them as top quality investments. I've read the paperwork on those - have you? They did market them, but with proper presentation in place. If they hadn't, they would have gone to jail. As it was, they paid a fine that was really "we don't want to have to pay lawyers money" to get out of some suits here and there, but you won't find lawsuits saying they misrepresented what was there. (People market bad investments all the time. People buy them all the time. You guys voted for Obama as a for instance.)
These are the major laws that resulted in the sub-prime mess. Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 - largely bipartisan. ...... The Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982, a Regan initiative with strong bipartisan support. The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act of 1999 was introduced by the Republicans that the act was named after. During debate in the House of Representatives, Rep. John Dingell (Democrat of Michigan) argued that the bill would result in banks becoming "too big to fail." Dingell further argued that this would necessarily result in a bailout by the Federal Government. ..... The Republicans did not fight the bills all the way.
You just cited a Huffington Post article. That, in and of itself discredits that claim. I love how they threw in conservatism there. <br />
What's more, such a broad generalization could be made about the other side. "A study indicates that joblessness, low income, an inability to succeed in business and liberalism is linked to low IQs." Makes about as much sense.
The conclusion of the study is unremarkable: "The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood". The study cannot be used to generalize about conservatives, just a generalization about lower IQ people.
Agreed. Sadly, though, too many people see "...published in Psychological Science.." and assume it's legitimate. I've found in most research studies, when you break down the controls used, most conclusions drawn have less to do with the study and more to do with the people drawing the conclusions.
I do realize that. However, if I cited Fox News using that study, the first thing that would hit your mind would be, "this should be a legitimate story". I read Huffington Post all the time. So I know who they are. I can assure you, if the study replaced the word "conservative" with "liberal", they wouldn't have reported the article.
they wouldn't have reported it if they put liberal because then it would be UNTRUE!
Hmm, I'm on the fence here. There are some highly intelligent prejudiced people in the world, and many less intelligent clued-up liberals. I think prejudices and politics are instilled in us as we grow up - nurture vs nature. But maybe what the study shows is that you need a certain level of intelligence (and the desire to do so) to be able to work out what you really believe in for yourself as you grow older - to separate the facts from the fiction you were told as a child.
Yes and no:<br />
I would say it is a matter of ignorance for a large part. People haven't a clue what being a conservative or what the platform is even really about. People have gotten extremely polarized about hot button issues but those issues in themselves are not what the core of conservatism is about. It would be like saying all Liberals are homosexuals. People unfortunately align themselves with what they relate to or were brought up to believe and don't truly educate themselves. They rely on propaganda like Fox news and never actually go try to find out what is truth or fiction. Somehow being liberal has the stigma of being weak and soft and no matter how much reason and logic you use with someone with that mentality they won't hear a word of it. Lastly it is about fear and fear is an emotion that brings about all kinds of other bad things like hate and anger for example. Nothing good can come from confrontation with people in that mind set.
I agree wholeheartedly. The racism and prejudice is a given with lower IQ's, and it only makes sense that conservatives (i.e. Republicans) have a lower IQ as well
Throughout history, the leftist intellectuals who unfortunately control most educational institutions in this country have always used studies like this to "prove" whatever their masters in the funding departments at government want them to prove. Studies like this was used by Hitler to proved the inferiority of jews and other ethnics too. <br />
Go to any conservative voting part of the country and then find a heavily dem oriented area nearby and tell me which has the workers and which has the people on welfare. I'll take the productive people (which will be found in the conservative neighborhoods) every single time.
If red states were 100% red and blue states were 100% blue you could make that distinction - but when examining voters maps it's pretty hard not to notice that slums, barrios and "projects" are almost always overwhelmingly democrat while middle class neighborhoods are either swing voters or GOP with the exception of heavy union areas on the midwest.
You've twisted my point. I mean that people who aren't working vote dem and people who are vote GOP. (Lots and lots of data to support this.) I'll side with the people who produce over the people who sit on their butts and want a handout anytime.
you are an arrogant little **** who assumes that every person on welfare does not work or refuses to work. Most areas that have welfare services ARE democratic, why? Because they like to HELP people! Upper class people vote republicans because they want republicans to lower their taxes and protect their guns. Here are some statistics for you......for every job that opens up there are four applicants for that job, the richest people in the country pay 18% of their income in taxes while lower middle class people pay a minimum of 24% of their income. Most recipients of welfare are going to work or school. Most welfare programs have time limits so that they cant just milk off the system as your people are always claiming they do. Most recorded cases of welfare abuse are done so by the case worker who takes advantage of the system and the people who need help. Most people on welfare are also veterans and disabled. Congress pays twice as much on corporate welfare (92 billion) than they do on all social welfare programs combined....and that aid goes to the most successful businesses and corporations. The highest rate of homeless people is in Washington D.C, and most of then are veterans.
Don't know where you got those stats from, I'm going to guess you pulled them out of your a ss. To expose the silliness of your argument, one simple statistic verifiable from multiple sources. 49% of American households pay NO federal taxes so your stat that "lower middle class households pay 24% of their income" becomes a bit hard to swallow. (State taxes are under 10% and social security is an insurance put-aside you should, in theory, get back.) Past that, your assertion that most on welfare are handicapped and/or working poor is not backed up by any facts I could find and doesn't pass a smell test. (My sense if you probably got this line from Daily Kos or the DNC - which is as worthwhile as a rightwinger quoting Rush Limbaugh)
Next issue: "corporate welfare." Lots of people - especially ignorant people such as yourself - don't realize that the vast majority of tax breaks corporations receive are incentive based. They go to things like rewarding corporations that hire the handicapped, buy American cars and equipment instead of imported, replace perfectly fine equipment with new stuff that is better for the environment, employee retraining,etc. If the tax breaks stopped they would simply not hire those handicapped people, fire the employees who don't have the skills they need and hire those that do, buy the best equipment for the job and keep their old equipment. The social engineering bullshit would go out the window, lower income people would be out on the street since they tend to be the ones that benefit from retraining programs, the handicapped wouldn't have the opportunities since it's cheaper not to have to deal with their issues, and liberals such as yourself would get their panties in a wad, but otherwise life would go on. If I seem "arrogant" to you, its perhaps because when I deal with children I don't fall into the liberal foolishness of treating children like adults and tend to talk to them as children. Now go outside and play. Adults are having a conversation here.
you are a disgusting human being....and I am sure you call yourself a christian. "49% of American households pay NO federal taxes so your stat that "lower middle class households pay 24% of their income" the two statistics are not incomparable and I have done extensive research you arrogant little *****. Give companies incentive......bullshit bullshit bullshit......you might as well say.....it is blood money to the evil giant so he wont come down from his cloud and stomp on the little people. You have so much smoke blown up you *** that your brain has stopped functioning. You logic is a twisted illusion and you are a destructive waste of space, holding back the evolution of humanity as a whole.
Actually, don't call myself a christian. (Agnostic.) Funny though, that the person who claims conservatives are racists would go into intolerance mode and try to bring religion into it. As for the rest, I know my numbers and what's going on around the world. It's completely obvious to anyone reading your posts that you do not. You want to believe that corporations are the root of all evil, I guess that's your right, but I work with them every day and know they're filled with people just like you and me. Further, I know that corporate profits are key to retirement accounts, pension plans, insurance payouts, etc. so I'm much less inclined to be upset when corporations make money. In fact, I love to see it. (I don't think government is evil - I just think it's incompetent. Every organization past a certain size inherently is - especially when the people at the top are idealists instead of realists.) Call me every nasty name you want. In find it amusing and it probably reflects worse on you than it ever could on me..
I get my facts from reliable sources, but you would know nothing about that. You are part of the system, thus part of the problem and you are blinded by it. Maybe one day your kind will see what is obvious to the sensible community, but as I see it you are a lost cause. Keep kissing the ***** of the big boys and remember to thank them when they p1ss on you.
and you have proven the point of the original Q, congrats.
Yes dear, I have no idea what color you are but my judgement of you for not knowing basic facts or current events proves I'm a racist. (Whatever it takes to make you feel good about yourself. Isn't that all that's important these days?)
Productive people who exploit the unskilled to line their pockets.
This is just another liberal pseudo intellectual with a preconceived opinion, cherry picking facts to support their own bias and this question is an obvious attempt by a liberal to stir shiet by calling their opponents names rather than supporting their liberalism with facts.<br />
The Huffington Post is not an unbiased news source
Hitler had some great studies about how jews and other races were inferior to aryans too. These studies are all inherently biased because it's impossible to actually define "conservative." For instance, go into a black church in the south and tell me if those are conservatives? They have guns, religion, etc. but you can't tell me they will be voting GOP next year.
The republican party wishes to entirely do away with the environmental protection agency...so yes, they are all for polluting the environment because they don't care, they can afford to buy filtered or distilled.
ForgottenMuse - Any person with some moderate amount of intelligence would have to know that asking this question in this forum was going stir up emotions, so it would have been either intentional or they were lacking in foresight themselves.
You are wrong again, Conservatives don't want to do away with environmental controls the simply want a equal balance struck between environmental concerns and the need for Industry and jobs in our country. The present environmental restrictions are so strict that they are forcing the outsourcing of jobs overseas to places with no controls at all. which in the long run is counterproductive to protecting the environment and US jobs.
Anything that does harm to the environment does harm to the Earth, and does harm to the sky, and does harm to the water, and does harm to humans. Human convenience has for far too long been the focus rather than the prevention of further environmental decay. More republican propaganda to try and steer the weak minded. Republicans are not interested in making good paying, long lasting jobs with vacation, pension, and benefits....they want labor jobs....menial, work horse positions that don't pay enough to pay the bills. Corporate welfare is set up in part to keep business profits up and still give them the ability to cut pay, pension, and job positions.
Disagree. It has nothing to do with IQ's it has a lot to do on how one is brought up in there environment, be it good bad or ugly, the ones that fallow on what they are told will stay the coarse most of the time, then theirs others that question what they see as wrong and ether speaks out or stay silent and see if someone ells makes a move on it....So i disagree on the study!...Respectfully my opinion and the fact I'm not into political correctness on the behavior of you and I. [ not you in particular just the all ]
I find this rather....well, hateful seems harsh, but along those lines.
I have known this for years. It is blatantly obvious. I would like it if everyone would stop pretending like conservatives, racists, bigots, misogynists, and stupid people are all different groups of people. THEY ARE usually THE SAME PEOPLE. Go out and find me a racist liberal....I dare you. Sure there are liberals that are stupid too, but the study was never meant to make ALL stupid people synonymous with conservatives.
Why do you not mention misandrists? Are you a female supremacist bigot yourself? It certainly sounds like it.
misandrists?...yeah, uh huh....sure.
What? A lib that doesn't know what misandry is.
It is an absurd term that conservatives like to throw around just like reverse discrimination and christian victimization.
Want to find a racist liberal? Can you say "Al Sharpton?" How about Jessie "Hymie in Hymie Town" Jackson." How about the leader of the nation of Islam? Here's an idea - go be a white person in South Central Los Angeles after midnight. You'll find plenty of racism in this part of town where the voting population is overewhelmingly democratic voting and liberal in voting record. (Same with Detroit, the Bronx, etc.)
there is no "nation of Islam"...Islam is not a nation. Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are also not racists, that is stupid. You see, there was this thing called slavery.....
To say that a person who starts race riots is not a racist is silly. (I can think of a whole jewish population in New York that would disagree about the racist status of Al Sharpton - though it's not as large as it once was what with the jews getting stabbed fro the sole reason that they were jews and all.) As for slavery, I can sight many, many articles that show it is alive and well and practiced by blacks in Africa and brown skinned people in Asia. Can you show me slavery in a white dominated society anytime in our lifetime or even our grandfathers?
you are scattering your brain all over the place, try not to strain yourself. The slavery in Africa and Asia is well known but has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. Those africans are not african-americans and the after affects of american slavery are still felt today. Btw, there is slavery in white dominated societies genius, they just don't call it slavery....its called corporate america and human trafficking....and they are both in good old america. Also, Al Sharpton has not waged war on Jews.
Lady Rhiannon - "Nation of Islam" is a religious movement and a big one - that is arguably a racists and leader Louis Farrakhan is as racist against whites as anyone I've ever met has been racist against whites. (And I grew up ina pretty hick town.) Rea up on them at NOI.org and in your mind substitute the word "black" for "white" when you see it in their preaching. If I called you a "black devil" that would probably sound racist and the words "white devil" appear in many, many of their leaders speeches.
Wow, way to totally ignore an issue. (Gosh, this slavery isn't the same as that slavery. I'm sure the people in chains doing work for no money don't see the difference.) The comparison of someone going to work voluntarily to earn pay for work performed and in accordance with numerous federal, state and local laws concerning wages, safety issues and benefits versus slavery is both ludicrous and embarrassing for you. if that's your idea of intelligent debate you are shooting blanks. RE: All Sharpton - that you continue to defend the guy and that you didn't even KNOW about Louis Farrakhan and th nation of Islam shows me I'm dealing with someone who is quite narrow in their knowledge.
your knowledge is based on fanatical interpretations of information and you are doing what moat of your kind does....twisting my words to make them sound like something else. Perhaps you are just so stupid that you can't register what I am saying. I am trying to discuss this country and you are focusing on the scary foreigner that have absolutely NO effect on your life whatsoever. You people just enjoy feeling like victims for once.
You seem to be the word twisting champion, You need to read some history, the slave traders that brought African slaves to the USA didn't go out and capture them themselves, Those Africans were sold into slavery by their own people. So you want to know who the descendants of the slave traders are - go look in the mirror.
You are assuming i am black...that is funny. So....I already knew that....what's your point?
Baby Rhiannon - You say I'm focused on some "scary foreigern" Which "scary foreigner" are you referring to? Al Sharpton? Louis Farrakhan? Both Americans living in the good old USA and neither person is exactly unknown. (Google them.) As for "fanatical interpretations" of information, I actually get incredibly well paid for my data analysis and I do work for some of the largest energy and consumer packaged goods companies in the country.
oh, so you are actually PART of the problem....that explains a lot. you cannot follow this conversation, and since you cannot make any rational points, and you are reverting to childish name calling, this conversation is over.
Person;'s with higher IQ's or more experience in lying are usually better in hiding their racism. That mean's they have the same issues but are less honest about it.
Speaking as a Social Scientist, I would assert that most racism and prejudice is attributable to ignorance, and cultural environment. There are those within such a culture who know that what is being professed is wrong, twisted, or misguided, but to co-exist, they silently accept the errors and live on in quiet frustration. But, too, I believe there others who are just lacking in intelligence to figure out what is truth. As a friend of mine is fond of saying: "you just can't fix stupid"
Have you debated supremacists from any other faction? If not, then why not? Are you not aware that there are supremacists from virtually every sizable group, or are you merely attempting to incite hatred against White people for how evil, bigoted, and backward they must be? As a Native American, I find such characterizations to be wholly evil.
I think that it is willful ignorance. When we consider the White Supremists in the South, most of them are born into, and raised in, poverty. Hating other races gives them a scapegoat; it's easier for them to hold someone else responsible for their conditions than it is for them to take responsibility and initiative. I've met religious fanatics who weren't much different in their approach to religion than the supremists are in their approaches to racism. I like your term "Willful ignorance". That term is very appropriate.
I'm Native American myself. Gagik indoojinokos. In Ojibwe that mean, "my name is Hawk". I have encountered hatred against Native Americans all my life, and I've found it largely to be cultural. They hate Native Americans because their parents hated Native Americans. I'm also Catholic, You wanna battle Supremists? Try being a Catholic Indian.
I get the link to racism and prejudice as they are motivated and fueled by ignorance and irrational fear. I can also see that many prejudiced people would also identify themselves as conservatives. But, given that many of the top earners in this country are also conservatives, I would think low IQ is not the only predictor of political ideology nor are conservatives, as a general rule, less intelligent than liberals.
Thank you for a great Question which got everyone thinking.
The IQ of many people behind bars exceeds that of the average american so aligning IQ with conservative and liberal would be a fallacy. I would venture to say that through out history it would be a pretty even division between conservative and liberal values among the most intelligent people who have ever lived.