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.

 

[Gibbke]

Most teachers are what could be described as lefties...!

Why? Sky News will tell you it's university indoctrination, but like any group of people in the one place you'll find all of them with their own beliefs and perspectives. It's a fairly disparate group of individuals in age, background and gender. The notion that all of them will agree as part of a child soldier-like conspiracy is laughably stupid...I sit there most days looking at almost every other staff member thinking "yeah, you and me, we are not the same..."...!

When discussing behaviour with the kids and their perception that teachers don't care, I ask them to answer honestly - are teachers generally intelligent? Begrudgingly, they say yes, they must be...we're in the business of learning and knowledge. I tell them that we're all different, that physics teacher is an out and out genius while I sometimes forget to bring my lunch or wear my shirt inside out all day, but generally, we're a bunch of smart, educated people who as a group are a pretty formidable unit brain-power and wisdom wise. What I couldn't tell you, that teacher I share a staffroom can. So why are we here in front of you instead of going out and getting better paid jobs with our supposedly superior intellects? Maybe we care about your future and answered a calling because we want to be here...at that point, some kids start pondering their attitudes...

What sits in front of us? Every day, an entire microcosm of society. My Geography class has boys, girls, advanced learners, special unit kids, ADHD, behavioural issues from abusive homes, perfect families, aboriginals, white Aussies, a couple of Italians, Asians and a Muslim, rich farmers, kids with borrowed uniforms and passes to get a free lunch from Student Services...this is par for the course. I had a friendly argument with a mate from high school who is a successful plumber, and he used the term "wait until they get into the real world". A plumber...who sets his own prices and schedule in a world of pure self-employed unaccountability, knowing or not realising, whatever, that his service is utterly indispensible...no mob with torches and pitchforks will ever chase the plumber out of town...! Who does he hang with? Other plumbers and tradies, not professions that demand academically gifted recruits, and like every other profession, primarily interested in what will benefit them and make their part of the world better. His world is tiny.

When Clive Palmer debates the Voice referendum, or interferes with federal elections, you know he's doing it primarily from the point of view of a rich mining magnate who really dgaf about a species threatened by the mine or land rights. The forestry worker is more interested in food on the table from clearing a forest than ecological impact. This doesn't make them evil or stupid or dumb (he says through gritted teeth realising it is Clive we're talking about), it just means that their primary interest, as it is with all people, is a type of self-interest based around their lives and making that life better for them and those close to them.

So teachers are lefties? You've got a group of people who are by necessity well read and who are constantly bombarded with information relating to everyone because they have to handle every type of person who walks into that classroom. They spend all day conversing, and there's a lot of collaboration based upon this information dispensing. And after all that, most come up with the conclusion that, whether they use this exact description or not, the socialist approach is the necessary one in the classroom and is the one that shapes their worldview...!

Conservatism is based upon the notion that everything is just fine as it is, so don't touch it. It uses labels to simplistically brand everything outside its borders - "woke", "lefties", etc - and rejects anything that means change. So if a group that's been dispossessed for 235 years makes the bold suggestion that Australia Day is inappropriate, this land was occupied previously, and community representation necessarily included people of that cultural group and not appointed white Aussies, the conservative will call it an attack. The teacher, however, has already heard all of this, maybe from the mouth of the kid whose family hates Invasion Day, or maybe from the cultural liason officer who is giving a staff meeting presentation on sorry business, because we're all wondering why 20 indigenous kids simultaneously took the week off!

What's the difference between the simplistically labelled "left" and "right"...? The right says it's fine, leave it, the left says it isn't, change it. If you have the knowledge and perspective to see that another group who aren't you are not sharing your privilege, meaning they aren't really interested in preserving your lifestyle, you're more likely to embrace that change, because at the core of it we'll all help each other if it's in your face - during a natural disaster here in Australia, right and left alike will help each other out, but if it was a Bangladesh flood, it starts to look a little more "woke"...! The left is more likely to ascribe to a world view or block your ride to work in the street during rush hour, the right will hoist the national flag even higher and buy a new racist bumper sticker!

I prefer the term "ignorant" to intelligent in the thread title. There are positive boneheads on both sides, and alternatively cutting edge intellects. The real frustration for someone like myself, who would be opening the bowling for Pakistan in an ODI if he was any more of a green lefty, is seeing clearly intelligent and articulate people with not that great a financial agenda, spouting easily dismantled right wing rhetoric...if only they'd use that persuasiveness more constructively. I seriously wonder how Jacinta Price or Ben Shapiro hang onto those stances...you know they're not "dumb", but...

 

[RedStarUncle]

Alston (wa political cartoonist) used to portray him in drag like the rocky horror picture show. Always wondered what that was about.


View attachment 1657368

Original photo in this article
But not sure the original article.

Also parodied to the extreme in the portrayal of Downer in Keating: The Musical.

 

[Gethelred]

Dutton is most certainly taking the Libs even further right.

I hope those who run the party see what going on in the US and start moving back to the centre

Not confident

I think you're giving him too much credit.

He's tooing and froing without much method or ability to know even how to approach things. He's like an alien reading a book on populism and wondering why the earthlings aren't doing what they should be doing. Far from taking them further right, they're more drifting that way without him being able to stop, direct or redirect it; MP's are leaving their portfolios out of ethical concerns around the voice, speaking out about issues that aren't party cleared. The IPA is chugging along irrelevantly, their fingers desperately searching for the zeitgeist but unable to find it. The donors are demanding results, but offer no solutions as to where or how to do it when at the height at their powers they commanded direction and rhetoric with equal amounts of success. Their media are screaming at them not to abandon their base - that's what it is they're doing; they're not telling the libs to go further right, they're genuinely terrified of the country moving away from where dogwhistling works as an appeal to the lower and middle classes - and it works and has worked sufficiently before that abandoning it could be premature from a tactical standpoint.

He's not leading, because his party and the surrounding environment aren't really letting him lead.

 

[kranky al]

I think you're giving him too much credit.

He's tooing and froing without much method or ability to know even how to approach things. He's like an alien reading a book on populism and wondering why the earthlings aren't doing what they should be doing. Far from taking them further right, they're more drifting that way without him being able to stop, direct or redirect it; MP's are leaving their portfolios out of ethical concerns around the voice, speaking out about issues that aren't party cleared. The IPA is chugging along irrelevantly, their fingers desperately searching for the zeitgeist but unable to find it. The donors are demanding results, but offer no solutions as to where or how to do it when at the height at their powers they commanded direction and rhetoric with equal amounts of success. Their media are screaming at them not to abandon their base - that's what it is they're doing; they're not telling the libs to go further right, they're genuinely terrified of the country moving away from where dogwhistling works as an appeal to the lower and middle classes - and it works and has worked sufficiently before that abandoning it could be premature from a tactical standpoint.

He's not leading, because his party and the surrounding environment aren't really letting him lead.

Ever see this video:




Absolute dick features blarwharbling about opening up in the middle of covid.

 

[the_interloper]

Keating was bjj in ufc 1

Downer was chi master

I think that video is both awesome and sad

 

[Not Important]

I think you're giving him too much credit.

He's tooing and froing without much method or ability to know even how to approach things. He's like an alien reading a book on populism and wondering why the earthlings aren't doing what they should be doing. Far from taking them further right, they're more drifting that way without him being able to stop, direct or redirect it; MP's are leaving their portfolios out of ethical concerns around the voice, speaking out about issues that aren't party cleared. The IPA is chugging along irrelevantly, their fingers desperately searching for the zeitgeist but unable to find it. The donors are demanding results, but offer no solutions as to where or how to do it when at the height at their powers they commanded direction and rhetoric with equal amounts of success. Their media are screaming at them not to abandon their base - that's what it is they're doing; they're not telling the libs to go further right, they're genuinely terrified of the country moving away from where dogwhistling works as an appeal to the lower and middle classes - and it works and has worked sufficiently before that abandoning it could be premature from a tactical standpoint.

He's not leading, because his party and the surrounding environment aren't really letting him lead.

there needs to be a major shift within the party. for the positions of peeps like those of bridget archer to carry the day rather than be dismissed and often belittled. can’t see that occurring anytime soon as they are in the grasp of murdoch and the murdoch run I.p.a. murdoch relies on cultivating the wacky right for his financial success. as we’ve seen by rupe’s backflip recently in the u.s.a.

spud is just there bc there’s no other viable arch-rightist at present.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I prefer the term "ignorant" to intelligent in the thread title...

I think it's more intellectual and emotional laziness myself, but that post of yours was BRILLIANT. Really spot-on observations. I always read of people, usually of a conservative bent, slagging teachers off by saying 'Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach'.

I've always thought that was crap. You, you know it's crap. Again, brilliant read

 

[Gibbke]

I think it's more intellectual and emotional laziness myself, but that post of yours was BRILLIANT. Really spot-on observations. I always read of people, usually of a conservative bent, slagging teachers off by saying 'Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach'.

I've always thought that was crap. You, you know it's crap. Again, brilliant read

And those who can't teach, teach gym...!

Thank you, my friend. To be accurate, I'm not telling the world that teachers are geniuses. I'm just saying that they're more likely to be left wing because the constant exposure to people of difference to ourselves tends to rub off...the inherent selfishness that is anti-socialism is lessened almost by definition. And it will be further shaped by the skillset of research and analysis that teachers need to possess...a simple quick fix from Sky News will never cut it...

 

[kranky al]

Most teachers are what could be described as lefties...!

Why? Sky News will tell you it's university indoctrination, but like any group of people in the one place you'll find all of them with their own beliefs and perspectives. It's a fairly disparate group of individuals in age, background and gender. The notion that all of them will agree as part of a child soldier-like conspiracy is laughably stupid...I sit there most days looking at almost every other staff member thinking "yeah, you and me, we are not the same..."...!

When discussing behaviour with the kids and their perception that teachers don't care, I ask them to answer honestly - are teachers generally intelligent? Begrudgingly, they say yes, they must be...we're in the business of learning and knowledge. I tell them that we're all different, that physics teacher is an out and out genius while I sometimes forget to bring my lunch or wear my shirt inside out all day, but generally, we're a bunch of smart, educated people who as a group are a pretty formidable unit brain-power and wisdom wise. What I couldn't tell you, that teacher I share a staffroom can. So why are we here in front of you instead of going out and getting better paid jobs with our supposedly superior intellects? Maybe we care about your future and answered a calling because we want to be here...at that point, some kids start pondering their attitudes...

What sits in front of us? Every day, an entire microcosm of society. My Geography class has boys, girls, advanced learners, special unit kids, ADHD, behavioural issues from abusive homes, perfect families, aboriginals, white Aussies, a couple of Italians, Asians and a Muslim, rich farmers, kids with borrowed uniforms and passes to get a free lunch from Student Services...this is par for the course. I had a friendly argument with a mate from high school who is a successful plumber, and he used the term "wait until they get into the real world". A plumber...who sets his own prices and schedule in a world of pure self-employed unaccountability, knowing or not realising, whatever, that his service is utterly indispensible...no mob with torches and pitchforks will ever chase the plumber out of town...! Who does he hang with? Other plumbers and tradies, not professions that demand academically gifted recruits, and like every other profession, primarily interested in what will benefit them and make their part of the world better. His world is tiny.

When Clive Palmer debates the Voice referendum, or interferes with federal elections, you know he's doing it primarily from the point of view of a rich mining magnate who really dgaf about a species threatened by the mine or land rights. The forestry worker is more interested in food on the table from clearing a forest than ecological impact. This doesn't make them evil or stupid or dumb (he says through gritted teeth realising it is Clive we're talking about), it just means that their primary interest, as it is with all people, is a type of self-interest based around their lives and making that life better for them and those close to them.

So teachers are lefties? You've got a group of people who are by necessity well read and who are constantly bombarded with information relating to everyone because they have to handle every type of person who walks into that classroom. They spend all day conversing, and there's a lot of collaboration based upon this information dispensing. And after all that, most come up with the conclusion that, whether they use this exact description or not, the socialist approach is the necessary one in the classroom and is the one that shapes their worldview...!

Conservatism is based upon the notion that everything is just fine as it is, so don't touch it. It uses labels to simplistically brand everything outside its borders - "woke", "lefties", etc - and rejects anything that means change. So if a group that's been dispossessed for 235 years makes the bold suggestion that Australia Day is inappropriate, this land was occupied previously, and community representation necessarily included people of that cultural group and not appointed white Aussies, the conservative will call it an attack. The teacher, however, has already heard all of this, maybe from the mouth of the kid whose family hates Invasion Day, or maybe from the cultural liason officer who is giving a staff meeting presentation on sorry business, because we're all wondering why 20 indigenous kids simultaneously took the week off!

What's the difference between the simplistically labelled "left" and "right"...? The right says it's fine, leave it, the left says it isn't, change it. If you have the knowledge and perspective to see that another group who aren't you are not sharing your privilege, meaning they aren't really interested in preserving your lifestyle, you're more likely to embrace that change, because at the core of it we'll all help each other if it's in your face - during a natural disaster here in Australia, right and left alike will help each other out, but if it was a Bangladesh flood, it starts to look a little more "woke"...! The left is more likely to ascribe to a world view or block your ride to work in the street during rush hour, the right will hoist the national flag even higher and buy a new racist bumper sticker!

I prefer the term "ignorant" to intelligent in the thread title. There are positive boneheads on both sides, and alternatively cutting edge intellects. The real frustration for someone like myself, who would be opening the bowling for Pakistan in an ODI if he was any more of a green lefty, is seeing clearly intelligent and articulate people with not that great a financial agenda, spouting easily dismantled right wing rhetoric...if only they'd use that persuasiveness more constructively. I seriously wonder how Jacinta Price or Ben Shapiro hang onto those stances...you know they're not "dumb", but...

Well written post.

 

[Grin]

Alston (wa political cartoonist) used to portray him in drag like the rocky horror picture show. Always wondered what that was about.


View attachment 1657368

Quite a few cartoonists did.
From memory he wore fishnet stockings and high heals for a charity event early in his career.

 

[kranky al]

I think that video is both awesome and sad

Awesome because it exposed him for a charlatan and sad because he actually believed his own bumf?

 

[the_interloper]

Most teachers are what could be described as lefties...!

Why? Sky News will tell you it's university indoctrination, but like any group of people in the one place you'll find all of them with their own beliefs and perspectives. It's a fairly disparate group of individuals in age, background and gender. The notion that all of them will agree as part of a child soldier-like conspiracy is laughably stupid...I sit there most days looking at almost every other staff member thinking "yeah, you and me, we are not the same..."...!

When discussing behaviour with the kids and their perception that teachers don't care, I ask them to answer honestly - are teachers generally intelligent? Begrudgingly, they say yes, they must be...we're in the business of learning and knowledge. I tell them that we're all different, that physics teacher is an out and out genius while I sometimes forget to bring my lunch or wear my shirt inside out all day, but generally, we're a bunch of smart, educated people who as a group are a pretty formidable unit brain-power and wisdom wise. What I couldn't tell you, that teacher I share a staffroom can. So why are we here in front of you instead of going out and getting better paid jobs with our supposedly superior intellects? Maybe we care about your future and answered a calling because we want to be here...at that point, some kids start pondering their attitudes...

What sits in front of us? Every day, an entire microcosm of society. My Geography class has boys, girls, advanced learners, special unit kids, ADHD, behavioural issues from abusive homes, perfect families, aboriginals, white Aussies, a couple of Italians, Asians and a Muslim, rich farmers, kids with borrowed uniforms and passes to get a free lunch from Student Services...this is par for the course. I had a friendly argument with a mate from high school who is a successful plumber, and he used the term "wait until they get into the real world". A plumber...who sets his own prices and schedule in a world of pure self-employed unaccountability, knowing or not realising, whatever, that his service is utterly indispensible...no mob with torches and pitchforks will ever chase the plumber out of town...! Who does he hang with? Other plumbers and tradies, not professions that demand academically gifted recruits, and like every other profession, primarily interested in what will benefit them and make their part of the world better. His world is tiny.

When Clive Palmer debates the Voice referendum, or interferes with federal elections, you know he's doing it primarily from the point of view of a rich mining magnate who really dgaf about a species threatened by the mine or land rights. The forestry worker is more interested in food on the table from clearing a forest than ecological impact. This doesn't make them evil or stupid or dumb (he says through gritted teeth realising it is Clive we're talking about), it just means that their primary interest, as it is with all people, is a type of self-interest based around their lives and making that life better for them and those close to them.

So teachers are lefties? You've got a group of people who are by necessity well read and who are constantly bombarded with information relating to everyone because they have to handle every type of person who walks into that classroom. They spend all day conversing, and there's a lot of collaboration based upon this information dispensing. And after all that, most come up with the conclusion that, whether they use this exact description or not, the socialist approach is the necessary one in the classroom and is the one that shapes their worldview...!

Conservatism is based upon the notion that everything is just fine as it is, so don't touch it. It uses labels to simplistically brand everything outside its borders - "woke", "lefties", etc - and rejects anything that means change. So if a group that's been dispossessed for 235 years makes the bold suggestion that Australia Day is inappropriate, this land was occupied previously, and community representation necessarily included people of that cultural group and not appointed white Aussies, the conservative will call it an attack. The teacher, however, has already heard all of this, maybe from the mouth of the kid whose family hates Invasion Day, or maybe from the cultural liason officer who is giving a staff meeting presentation on sorry business, because we're all wondering why 20 indigenous kids simultaneously took the week off!

What's the difference between the simplistically labelled "left" and "right"...? The right says it's fine, leave it, the left says it isn't, change it. If you have the knowledge and perspective to see that another group who aren't you are not sharing your privilege, meaning they aren't really interested in preserving your lifestyle, you're more likely to embrace that change, because at the core of it we'll all help each other if it's in your face - during a natural disaster here in Australia, right and left alike will help each other out, but if it was a Bangladesh flood, it starts to look a little more "woke"...! The left is more likely to ascribe to a world view or block your ride to work in the street during rush hour, the right will hoist the national flag even higher and buy a new racist bumper sticker!

I prefer the term "ignorant" to intelligent in the thread title. There are positive boneheads on both sides, and alternatively cutting edge intellects. The real frustration for someone like myself, who would be opening the bowling for Pakistan in an ODI if he was any more of a green lefty, is seeing clearly intelligent and articulate people with not that great a financial agenda, spouting easily dismantled right wing rhetoric...if only they'd use that persuasiveness more constructively. I seriously wonder how Jacinta Price or Ben Shapiro hang onto those stances...you know they're not "dumb", but...

This is an excellent post I must say. It would be interesting to know how the political compass differs on average between a government school and a Catholic private school for example, I'm assuming there's more right than left there. Or maybe I'm wrong, I mean at the end of the day teachers teach to get paid and support their families so I'm sure many subdue personal views at times to ensure their career. (I certainly do this within my employment).

I guess traditionally conservatives want to "leave things alone", I mean our conservative governments certainly do make policy to change the equilibrium of an economy, minimum wage etc, but overall that's fair. I guess it does indicate our right and left are a bit closer than the US in that sense.

The only thing I would point out (this is nothing against you btw) we have been repeatedly told by Gethelred that we aren't allowed to debate the premise in the thread title. Seems to be the only thread on BF where we can't do this, but this has seemingly been allowed. Again your point re ignorant instead of intelligent is a good one, just wanted to point this out.

 

[the_interloper]

Awesome because it exposed him for a charlatan and sad because he actually believed his own bumf?

It's awesome because it exposes how there were a lot of "grifters" in the martial arts world giving out black belts and espousing the virtues of their fighting systems when they often don't work in real combat. The rise of MMA has exposed a lot of these people which is a good thing, not that doing katas etc are useless but they give people a false sense of ability with teachers like this.

It's sad because I feel this old fella really believed he was a trained killer and would take out this MMA fool. Plus his students watching probably thought he was some sort of god. Ehhh, dose of reality for them I guess.

 

[kranky al]

It's awesome because it exposes how there were a lot of "grifters" in the martial arts world giving out black belts and espousing the virtues of their fighting systems when they often don't work in real combat. The rise of MMA has exposed a lot of these people which is a good thing, not that doing katas etc are useless but they give people a false sense of ability with teachers like this.

It's sad because I feel this old fella really believed he was a trained killer and would take out this MMA fool. Plus his students watching probably thought he was some sort of god. Ehhh, dose of reality for them I guess.

Im sort of still unconvinced about mma being the be all and end all of martial arts.

When you have rules against groin strikes, throat punches and eye gouging etc, you are neutering fight ending strikes… for obvious reasons of course. But when practitioners of certain arts have half their arsenal taken off them and the half that’s taken ends the fight with one blow….

Wing chun and krav maga are probably the ones that’s suffered the most from this.

Bjj does well out of it in some respects (eye attacks and groin attacks) but does badly out of rounds - once a bjj / sambo / greco roman practitioner has a fighter on the ground often you arent getting up without a round ending. Noone ends rounds in a streetfight.

 

[Gethelred]

This is an excellent post I must say. It would be interesting to know how the political compass differs on average between a government school and a Catholic private school for example, I'm assuming there's more right than left there. Or maybe I'm wrong, I mean at the end of the day teachers teach to get paid and support their families so I'm sure many subdue personal views at times to ensure their career. (I certainly do this within my employment).

I guess traditionally conservatives want to "leave things alone", I mean our conservative governments certainly do make policy to change the equilibrium of an economy, minimum wage etc, but overall that's fair. I guess it does indicate our right and left are a bit closer than the US in that sense.

The only thing I would point out (this is nothing against you btw) we have been repeatedly told by Gethelred that we aren't allowed to debate the premise in the thread title. Seems to be the only thread on BF where we can't do this, but this has seemingly been allowed. Again your point re ignorant instead of intelligent is a good one, just wanted to point this out.

... that post discusses - at length - the thread topic, and at no point has a mod removed posts from this thread that complain about the thread topic or try to debate the assumptions inherent.

One wonders why your jimmies are still rustled a good 10 months later, that you're still tagging me back in here to whinge about the thread topic.

 

[Gibbke]

Whoops...sorry...! Didn't see any of that business...I went straight to page 44 on my holiday with a cold one and temps up here way too hot for mowing, and went philosophising...

 

[Gibbke]

This is an excellent post I must say. It would be interesting to know how the political compass differs on average between a government school and a Catholic private school for example, I'm assuming there's more right than left there. Or maybe I'm wrong, I mean at the end of the day teachers teach to get paid and support their families so I'm sure many subdue personal views at times to ensure their career. (I certainly do this within my employment).

I know a few who are on the right. It surprises me that they're all history teachers too! If any occupation was going to make you analyse human society and come up with the notion that it's a big and complicated world out there that needs a lot more "being excellent to each other", history teacher would surely be near the top of the list...! One I argued with about Australia Day, and he's adamant the day should be about the start of British colonisation and if you don't like it you can leave...he regularly quotes Mark Latham as well as bumper stickers! Another is very pro-Israel, and his best buddy from my old days at that school is a bible-bashing Muslim hater (you'd have to read her to believe it, the sheer hatred).

I don't think you'd see that much difference in the attitudes between public and religious schools. The private schoolers I know, if they're suppressing anything, are going along with the religious positions of their school, rather than anything overtly political. A lot of token support for religious instruction, etc...they're just happy to have the job and don't see a bit of god bothering as anything but preaching to the choir...that's if they even have to do it at all. A humanities teacher up here last year went to a state conference where the theme was Global Community...they demonstrated work that was done with that in mind, and while poorer state schools would collect shoes and write cards, etc, one of the private schools went on an extensive foster care programme which also included online buddy lessons...! Pretty clearly, it was a money difference, but the attitudes were the same. You often find student protesters come from more well off state schools or the private sector - generalising, the kids are a bit more articulate, more up on world affairs (that class I've got here in rural FNQ...god, they literally don't know anything!), more exposed to uni education maybe through family or the intention their family has for their future, and money...so when a right wing commentator goes off on a rant against the uppity youth of today demonstrating during class time, they probably come from his old school...!

Those right wing teachers above...they are older, and I'm supposing the notion of career change at a later stage is more difficult. I'm exactly the same...coasting a bit thinking more about building funds for retirement and paying off this house and making sure my 11yo gets through to the end of school, rather than looking for the dream job. I'm stuck here. I'd imagine younger right wingers would leave early these days if they even finish the uni course, thinking everything's all "woke"...! When I started teaching, around the time of the Mabo decision in the early 90's, there still was an element of Kingswood Country around the nation...things were about to change a bit...

 

[Grin]

The only thing I would point out (this is nothing against you btw) we have been repeatedly told by Gethelred that we aren't allowed to debate the premise in the thread title. Seems to be the only thread on BF where we can't do this, but this has seemingly been allowed. Again your point re ignorant instead of intelligent is a good one, just wanted to point this out.

Go back and read the OP again and you'll learn why.
This thread is about why, not if. I've explained on many occasions why I set that parameter, but I'll explain it to you again:
Say, for example you started a thread asking how we respond to global warming, but it's hijacked by RWNJs wanting to argue the toss about the existence of global warming in the first place, your thread would be at risk of being derailed would it not?
I have invited righties to start their own thread about the "if", but on every occasion thy have refused. Presumably because doing that wouldn't involve derailing this thread.
I get that you feel terribly victimised, and that conservatives love nothing more than a good whinge about how unbearably unjust and discriminatory the world is toward them. All the same, I would rather this thread not be derailed by Murdoch drones. Not that I'm accusing you of being one.
On the other hand, they could make a valuable contribution to this thread by explaining why they gravitate to the conservative/right wing side of politics, even though, on the face of it, it's against their own interests.
My impression is that they're being manipulated, but I'm happy to stand corrected.

 

[FireKrakouer]

On the other hand, they could make a valuable contribution to this thread by explaining why they gravitate to the conservative/right wing side of politics, even though, on the face of it, it's against their own interests.
My impression is that they're being manipulated, but I'm happy to stand corrected.

Even though the trolling here is obvious, I'll give a good faith answer as this thread just won't die.

My old man grew up the child of 2 immigrants who worked as farm labourers and could not even speak English. They were broke af and he didn't learn English until he started school at 5yo.

Long story short, he made good decisions and worked hard and became wealthy af as an adult. He believes in old fashioned values, the "lift yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality, all that stuff. He figures that if he went from rags to riches then anyone can. Loves a lil Andrew Bolt.

Hence I was raised in a RWNJ house. Even though he was a relentlessly angry campaigner to me growing up, he (and most successful people I looked up to) subscribed to conservative thinking. And why wouldn't I trust them over the unemployed guy smoking bongs on his couch up the road who insisted that the lefties have it right?

It took me until about I was about 30 to fall on truly hard times in terms of finances, health, legal issues etc, to develop appropriate compassion for those who are struggling and realise that (IMO) the centre-left have it right economically and socially. For most people it is extremely difficult to fully understand and empathise with other people who are facing an issue that you yourself have not experienced directly.

With the advent of social media, politics has become dumbed down to reality TV style culture war bs. Our headlines are about RWNJs being offended by a transwoman on a beer can and the LWNJs being offended by a wizard video game. That's where I claim the "centrist" card and say everyone is just being ridiculous.

 

[Grin]

Even though the trolling here is obvious, I'll give a good faith answer as this thread just won't die.

My old man grew up the child of 2 immigrants who worked as farm labourers and could not even speak English. They were broke af and he didn't learn English until he started school at 5yo.

Long story short, he made good decisions and worked hard and became wealthy af as an adult. He believes in old fashioned values, the "lift yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality, all that stuff. He figures that if he went from rags to riches then anyone can. Loves a lil Andrew Bolt.

Hence I was raised in a RWNJ house. Even though he was a relentlessly angry campaigner to me growing up, he (and most successful people I looked up to) subscribed to conservative thinking. And why wouldn't I trust them over the unemployed guy smoking bongs on his couch up the road who insisted that the lefties have it right?

It took me until about I was about 30 to fall on truly hard times in terms of finances, health, legal issues etc, to develop appropriate compassion for those who are struggling and realise that (IMO) the centre-left have it right economically and socially. For most people it is extremely difficult to fully understand and empathise with other people who are facing an issue that you yourself have not experienced directly.

With the advent of social media, politics has become dumbed down to reality TV style culture war bs. Our headlines are about RWNJs being offended by a transwoman on a beer can and the LWNJs being offended by a wizard video game. That's where I claim the "centrist" card and say everyone is just being ridiculous.

The far right appears to have captured the votes of anti vaccers, anti climate science and followers of various conspiracy theories. These are the people I'm largely referring to. I think it's entirely rational that people who have been victims of, for example, a 'communist' regime to vote right wing, even if it does appear to be against their interests at times. I also think, historically, the Liberal party has represented the interests of small business and relatively wealthy city dwelling types, but during and since the Howard government, has assumed it can keep this base whilst representing the interests of the extremely wealthy, multinational companies and appealing to ignorance, bigotry through culture wars, to the detriment of almost everything else it has stood for in the past, particularly in terms of the centre right. Initially with some considerable success.

 

[Saint]

Even though the trolling here is obvious, I'll give a good faith answer as this thread just won't die.

My old man grew up the child of 2 immigrants who worked as farm labourers and could not even speak English. They were broke af and he didn't learn English until he started school at 5yo.

Long story short, he made good decisions and worked hard and became wealthy af as an adult. He believes in old fashioned values, the "lift yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality, all that stuff. He figures that if he went from rags to riches then anyone can. Loves a lil Andrew Bolt.

Hence I was raised in a RWNJ house. Even though he was a relentlessly angry campaigner to me growing up, he (and most successful people I looked up to) subscribed to conservative thinking. And why wouldn't I trust them over the unemployed guy smoking bongs on his couch up the road who insisted that the lefties have it right?

It took me until about I was about 30 to fall on truly hard times in terms of finances, health, legal issues etc, to develop appropriate compassion for those who are struggling and realise that (IMO) the centre-left have it right economically and socially. For most people it is extremely difficult to fully understand and empathise with other people who are facing an issue that you yourself have not experienced directly.

With the advent of social media, politics has become dumbed down to reality TV style culture war bs. Our headlines are about RWNJs being offended by a transwoman on a beer can and the LWNJs being offended by a wizard video game. That's where I claim the "centrist" card and say everyone is just being ridiculous.

Compassion is certainly something lacking on both extremes. I'm often surprised when people in the Greens or socialists are surprised that farmers are very conservative and vote Nationals and for morons like Barnaby Joyce. But if you've lived out there and spoken to most of these people, it's entirely understandable. So when lefties say they're "wrong" or bigots for holding onto "traditional" values it doesn't persuade them at all, but drive them in the other direction.

The kind of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" opportunities which were around in the 60-90's are fewer and fewer. There's still a ridiculous amount of opportunity here if you know where to look and don't happen to have many of the circumstances which might hold you back, relative to other nations, but there are also generations and groups locked out of many of these chances through no fault of their own (divorce, death in the family, mental illness, physical illness or disability, homelessness, addiction, caring for a loved one).

Sometimes it can be one poor life decision or set of bad luck (like putting all your money into a new restaurant fit-out and training and then COVID hits). Then you're homeless, family breaks down and your financial future will never be comfortable again.

 

[Gethelred]

Even though the trolling here is obvious, I'll give a good faith answer as this thread just won't die.

My old man grew up the child of 2 immigrants who worked as farm labourers and could not even speak English. They were broke af and he didn't learn English until he started school at 5yo.

Long story short, he made good decisions and worked hard and became wealthy af as an adult. He believes in old fashioned values, the "lift yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality, all that stuff. He figures that if he went from rags to riches then anyone can. Loves a lil Andrew Bolt.

Hence I was raised in a RWNJ house. Even though he was a relentlessly angry campaigner to me growing up, he (and most successful people I looked up to) subscribed to conservative thinking. And why wouldn't I trust them over the unemployed guy smoking bongs on his couch up the road who insisted that the lefties have it right?

It took me until about I was about 30 to fall on truly hard times in terms of finances, health, legal issues etc, to develop appropriate compassion for those who are struggling and realise that (IMO) the centre-left have it right economically and socially. For most people it is extremely difficult to fully understand and empathise with other people who are facing an issue that you yourself have not experienced directly.

This is why I keep at you to actively stop trolling, FK! You're good at the sincere when you go for it; this is an excellent response to both the thread question, and shows consideration at a deep level.

Like it. Do it more. Elevates your posting.

With the advent of social media, politics has become dumbed down to reality TV style culture war bs. Our headlines are about RWNJs being offended by a transwoman on a beer can and the LWNJs being offended by a wizard video game. That's where I claim the "centrist" card and say everyone is just being ridiculous.

I really think one's depth of interaction with politics and the political is solely up to the individual; ie, if you're into it, you're going to find material that is at your level of willingness to spend time delving into the complexity of it. The red pill approach is more immediately persuasive and actively seeks to use emotional hooks to pull you ever deeper, but a left wing series of discourses isn't all that different in terms of desire to appeal to or draw in potential consumers.

I recently watched a video speaking - funnily enough - about youtube drama on Breadtube, and how every left winger on the platform that comprises BT is at least on some level complicit in what Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer both labelled 'The Culture Industry'; that those who disseminate information do so at the behest - whether conscious or not - of those who hold the means of production. On Youtube, that's the algorithm; it pulls you into ever more new content, without much more determination than what will cause you to consume more content which will show you more ads. The algorithm draws you from interesting/artistic left leaning content to left leaning outrage fuel/response content, and from there you're drawn into he said/she said tit for tat on the culture wars.

I think there's a difference between trolling both sides - 'I'm a centrist, y'all are nuts' - and choosing not to partake in a genuine way. You don't have to be a part of the outrage industry promoted. There's something deeply seductive about the parasocial relationships developed online, and simply by choosing not to look away you are as affected by it as though you entered into the discussion on face value; otherwise deeply intelligent people are drawn into drama purely via proximity. You need look no further than our Meghan Markle/Harry thread for evidence of that; that shit is sordid, dumb, and really not anyone's business but the Windsors, but there's an industry of people pulled into it almost despite themselves. There are avowed republicans in that thread slagging off at Meghan like a royal devotee. Trust is - in real terms - familiarity plus time; you develop knowledge of how people react and are going to react, and your own brain starts to replicate that feeling; you 'feel' it, purely as a part of that community even if only as a troll on its edges.

Now, far be it for me to tell you what to do (he says in a post that tells you what to do!) but throwing a label over yourself is a reduction of self. I think you're more complex than that; the post I'm responding to would certainly suggest so.

 

[the_interloper]

... that post discusses - at length - the thread topic, and at no point has a mod removed posts from this thread that complain about the thread topic or try to debate the assumptions inherent.

One wonders why your jimmies are still rustled a good 10 months later, that you're still tagging me back in here to whinge about the thread topic.

I guess I just see it as a bit hypocritical that's all, and Gibbke 's excellent post showed the value that debating the premise of a thread (even slightly) adds a lot to the debate. I did similar and got shut down for it a few times, granted I'm sure he made his point more eloquently than I did, perhaps that's why it was allowed.

I didn't accuse you of deleting posts, but pretty sure you've put a demand on everyone to assume your premise was accurate or you couldn't discuss it, do I have that correct?

 

[the_interloper]

Im sort of still unconvinced about mma being the be all and end all of martial arts.

When you have rules against groin strikes, throat punches and eye gouging etc, you are neutering fight ending strikes… for obvious reasons of course. But when practitioners of certain arts have half their arsenal taken off them and the half that’s taken ends the fight with one blow….

Wing chun and krav maga are probably the ones that’s suffered the most from this.

Bjj does well out of it in some respects (eye attacks and groin attacks) but does badly out of rounds - once a bjj / sambo / greco roman practitioner has a fighter on the ground often you arent getting up without a round ending. Noone ends rounds in a streetfight.

Your point is fair, MMA is not designed for the street and a lot of the traditional martial arts are, well at least they started that way. As those arts tended to sport versions a lot of the effectiveness was taken away, yet it let people believe that a black belt made them unbeatable, even though they probably couldn't defend themselves that well.

Wing chun can certainly be effective, krav maga fighters fought in early UFCs and didn't do too well. I think a few who fought in it early thought they had these "deadly blows" that would incapacitate anyone, well it never really happened.

Go back and read the OP again and you'll learn why.
This thread is about why, not if. I've explained on many occasions why I set that parameter, but I'll explain it to you again:
Say, for example you started a thread asking how we respond to global warming, but it's hijacked by RWNJs wanting to argue the toss about the existence of global warming in the first place, your thread would be at risk of being derailed would it not?
I have invited righties to start their own thread about the "if", but on every occasion thy have refused. Presumably because doing that wouldn't involve derailing this thread.
I get that you feel terribly victimised, and that conservatives love nothing more than a good whinge about how unbearably unjust and discriminatory the world is toward them. All the same, I would rather this thread not be derailed by Murdoch drones. Not that I'm accusing you of being one.
On the other hand, they could make a valuable contribution to this thread by explaining why they gravitate to the conservative/right wing side of politics, even though, on the face of it, it's against their own interests.
My impression is that they're being manipulated, but I'm happy to stand corrected.

I don't feel terribly victimised to be honest, just making a point which seems to be a sensitive one for some reason. And do you really think you might get conservatives coming into a thread to debate the topic on merit given the title calling them "less intelligent"?

I'm happy to start a thread about if conservatives are less intelligent or not, but let's be honest, do we need two different threads about it? Isn't it part of the same conversation?

 

[Gethelred]

I guess I just see it as a bit hypocritical that's all, and Gibbke 's excellent post showed the value that debating the premise of a thread (even slightly) adds a lot to the debate. I did similar and got shut down for it a few times, granted I'm sure he made his point more eloquently than I did, perhaps that's why it was allowed.

I didn't accuse you of deleting posts, but pretty sure you've put a demand on everyone to assume your premise was accurate or you couldn't discuss it, do I have that correct?

My posts are still there: what I've said - multiple times - is that why is a much more interesting question than if is, and if you think less intelligent people do not gravitate towards conservative/right wing ideology there's nowhere for you to go. You disagree, you provide your reasons why you disagree; that's it, conversation over. You're stuck. If you don't want to move, no-one's moving you.

Why, on the other hand, can be discussed at length. Providing reasons, speculating, discussing things. Why is a search for understanding.

It's also a deeply interesting exercise in poster ideology, whether one's internal ideology corresponds to their purported ideological bent. For the right, argument is about performing strength; you state your position firmly, unshakably, and you refuse to move or allow another to dictate to you what 'real' or 'right' is. If someone tries to counter your argument with facts, you still refuse to move; they're reading the facts incorrectly, they're point blank wrong. You are not interested in thought, argument, logic, reason; you're interested in who's right. Problem is, who's right is more about who wins as opposed to whose argument is best, whose reasoning is most sound, whose logic follows better. Left wing discourse is much more interested in explainations, arriving at the correct view through consensus and compromise. You seek truth, and the process by which you arrive at truth is not through strength but through understanding; therefore, you seek the why almost instinctively.

A leftie will be perfectly okay with compromising on something they disagree with 'for the sake of argument' (meaning, 'I don't agree with the assumption, but for the sake of argument I assume it to be true') in order to have the followup discussion; a rightie will never concede that initial ground, because ceding any ground at all is a failure to assume the correct position/posture.

So, there's three things going on in this thread (which is why it won't die):

• lefties trying to answer the thread topic as best they can, righties trying to position themselves in opposition to it; ie, the superficial.
• observing whether a poster's rhetorical approach is at odds with their position on the thread topic (are you seeking to approach the question, whether or not you agree with the assumption inherent within it?)
• point blank, unabashed opportunities for subtle (and unsubtle) trolling.

So, I've not really even tried to tell others to stop talking, beyond simply telling them what I think is going on; that they're being cleverly, expertly trolled while someone conducts a social experiment on argument methods between left/right leaning posters.