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.

 

[mcnulty]

GS is a lovely bloke

Unfortunately the mod algorithm went three letters early and we got a loon instead.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Unfortunately the mod algorithm went three letters early and we got a loon instead.

Continued mod bashing is not advised. Especially not with your track record.

You won't get another warning.

 

[mcnulty]

True. Maybe it's more true to ask "Why do less thoughtful people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology?'
And yes empathy, the seed of 'common good' consideration rather than just 'individual pursuit', is a key part.

What is best for the common good though? Reasonable people on either side can disagree, but for those people I would argue what unites them still far outweighs what separates them.

 

[Grin]

The discussion is if conservative ideology attracts less intelligent people, which I've countered with extreme ideology in general does.

I didn't invite discussing the merits of genocide vs climate change.

That isn't the discussion. The discussion is specifically the question why less intelligent people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology, not if.

Look, I know that's only been made very clear a few dozen times, and it'll take much, much more than that for our right wing conservative centralist brethren on Big Footy to comprehend. I do understand that whilst they desperately want to debate if, not why, they clearly lacked the intellectual capacity to create a thread about it. So, I very generously generously made one for them:

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

This is a thread created for our resident right wing posters, you know, the ones who insist they're Centralists. In a similarly titled thread some of you whinged bitterly (as you do, all the time) that you weren't permitted to derail it by debating a different topic. You passionately wanted to...

www.bigfooty.com

You're welcome

Even more specific to your point: furious that he wasn't able to derail this thread with red herrings, but in an amazing intellectual feat for a centralist, Carringbush2010 created a thread all by himself addressing specifically your question:

Society/Culture - Why do less intelligent people gravitate towards fringe extremist views?

Ok peeps, the rules. Only discuss the why, coz the whether or not is not up for debate. No ifs buts or maybes - the less intelligent gravitate towards fringe extremism. If you debate that less intelligent people do not gravitate towards the fringes I'll report you to the mods. Anyway here's a...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[bzparkes]

That isn't the discussion. The discussion is specifically the question why less intelligent people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology, not if.

Look, I know that's only been made very clear a few dozen times, and it'll take much, much more than that for our right wing conservative centralist brethren on Big Footy to comprehend. I do understand that whilst they desperately want to debate if, not why, they clearly lacked the intellectual capacity to create a thread about it. So, I very generously generously made one for them:

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

This is a thread created for our resident right wing posters, you know, the ones who insist they're Centralists. In a similarly titled thread some of you whinged bitterly (as you do, all the time) that you weren't permitted to derail it by debating a different topic. You passionately wanted to...

www.bigfooty.com

You're welcome

Even more specific to your point: furious that he wasn't able to derail this thread with red herrings, but in an amazing intellectual feat for a centralist, Carringbush2010 created a thread all by himself addressing specifically your question:

Society/Culture - Why do less intelligent people gravitate towards fringe extremist views?

Ok peeps, the rules. Only discuss the why, coz the whether or not is not up for debate. No ifs buts or maybes - the less intelligent gravitate towards fringe extremism. If you debate that less intelligent people do not gravitate towards the fringes I'll report you to the mods. Anyway here's a...

www.bigfooty.com

Do you think throwing soup on the Mona Lisa, or supergluing your hands to the road and blocking emergency vehicles requires intelligence and critical thinking?

 

[Grin]

Do you think throwing soup on the Mona Lisa, or supergluing your hands to the road and blocking emergency vehicles requires intelligence and critical thinking?

Harder than creating a thread I reckon. Definitely harder than clicking on one that addresses the very topic you wish to discuss

 

[bzparkes]

Harder than creating a thread I reckon. Definitely harder than clicking on one that addresses the very topic you wish to discuss

Cool, so shall I start a thread named "Why do low IQ, idiotic morons gravitate to the far-left?" then?

Because I'm sure that'll either get deleted, or be flooded by teary posters stating that it's the far-right that's the problem.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Cool, so shall I start a thread named "Why do low IQ, idiotic morons gravitate to the far-left?" then?

Because I'm sure that'll either get deleted, or be flooded by teary posters stating that it's the far-right that's the problem.

You could just use the comments section below the Sky News article.

 

[ElectricG]

OP returning for his monthly MENSA reunion.

Cool, so shall I start a thread named "Why do low IQ, idiotic morons gravitate to the far-left?" then?

Because I'm sure that'll either get deleted, or be flooded by teary posters stating that it's the far-right that's the problem.

lol a user created a fairly neutral thread about how less intelligent people gravitate to extreme ideologies (or something) and ghosty had his toys out of the cot in about five seconds

 

[bzparkes]

OP returning for his monthly MENSA reunion.


lol a user created a fairly neutral thread about how less intelligent people gravitate to extreme ideologies (or something) and ghosty had his toys out of the cot in about five seconds

Apparently if you ask a loaded question and get easily refuted it means you either can't follow the thread premise(despite said people defending the thread topic using insane whataboutism) or need to start your own thread, where they come in and refute your thread premise instead of attempting to discuss the topic.

Incredible amount of hypocrisy on this board, to say the least.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Apparently if you ask a loaded question and get easily refuted it means you either can't follow the thread premise(despite said people defending the thread topic using insane whataboutism) or need to start your own thread, where they come in and refute your thread premise instead of attempting to discuss the topic.

Incredible amount of hypocrisy on this board, to say the least.

Grin provided links to the correct thread/s for your um, grievances.

 

[mcnulty]

Harder than creating a thread I reckon. Definitely harder than clicking on one that addresses the very topic you wish to discuss

He has a point though. If you are going to point out egregious idiocy from one side of the political spectrum, it’s fair enough to do that for the other side. Saying it’s not the thread topic seems like a dodge.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Incredible amount of hypocrisy on this board, to say the least.

The internet doesn't need more save havens for blue rinse boomers. You already have facebook and myspace.

 

[bzparkes]

Grin provided links to the correct thread/s for your um, grievances.

So why didn't Grin post this topic in there instead of wanting a circle-jerk in here?

That thread's older, so this one should've been merged, unless OP is disingenuous and simply wants to push a side?

 

[bzparkes]

The internet doesn't need more save havens for blue rinse boomers. You already have facebook and myspace.

The SRP is a literal safe-space for certain posters.

Your comment proves my point.

 

[ElectricG]

He has a point though. If you are going to point out egregious idiocy from one side of the political spectrum, it’s fair enough to do that for the other side. Saying it’s not the thread topic seems like a dodge.

Sick of getting their arses kicked in arguments day in day out so they start threads where the discussion starts with you agreeing with them.

And they reckon right wingers centralists are intellectually lazy.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

The SRP is a literal safe-space for certain posters.

Your comment proves my point.

It's literally a safe-space for any poster that follows the rules.

 

[ElectricG]

It's literally a safe-space for any poster that follows the rules.

About time you started being funny

 

[bzparkes]

It's literally a safe-space for any poster that follows the rules.

No, it's a pile-on against posters who question the narrative by the majority of posters on here.

It's almost reached echo-chamber status.

 

[mcnulty]

Sick of getting their arses kicked in arguments day in day out so they start threads where the discussion starts with you agreeing with them.

And they reckon right wingers centralists are intellectually lazy.

Threads meander all over the place in here. This sudden insistence on rigid adherence to the thread topic is pretty funny.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

No, it's a pile-on against posters who question the narrative by the majority of posters on here.

It's almost reached echo-chamber status.

If you say silly things, people are going to push back.

It's not a safe space for dumb ideas.

 

[Grin]

Cool, so shall I start a thread named "Why do low IQ, idiotic morons gravitate to the far-left?" then?

Because I'm sure that'll either get deleted, or be flooded by teary posters stating that it's the far-right that's the problem.

Knock yourself out.
You could also make a very valuable contribution to this thread. Well, you already have
Another idea for a thread could be 'Why are right wing conservatives so angry all the time?' or 'Why do right wing conservative direct their perennial anger at the less fortunate?' or 'Why are wealthy right wing conservatives so terribly victimised in Australia' or 'Reality and facts are woke' etc. You could create heaps of threads voicing angry outrage at the unbearable injustices our right wing conservative brethren face on a daily basis.

However, this thread's about a specific topic. Please try to focus

 

[Chief]

Do you think throwing soup on the Mona Lisa,

Never happened. It was a Van Gogh, and the painting wasn't harmed.

or supergluing your hands to the road

Yes this happened.

and blocking emergency vehicles

Emergency services said they had other routes to take and none were blocked.

requires intelligence and critical thinking?

And in the end, this is a post referencing individual acts you saw as unintelligent, and one outcome that never happened.

The OP claim is about a general tendency to gravitate towards one end of the political spectrum, related to intelligence.

 

[bzparkes]

If you say silly things, people are going to push back


It's not a safe space for dumb ideas.

Who are nobodies on the internet to judge what's a good idea or not?

It's entirely fine to have a discussion around those things, it's another to be repeatedly called a bigot/racist/etc, simply because you question the rationale behind letting in undocumented migrants to a country en masse.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

The OP claim is about a general tendency to gravitate towards one end of the political spectrum, related to intelligence.

The graph of cognitive decline with age, roughly corresponds with the left to right, or progressive to conservative political drift, with age.