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.

 

[Chief]

If your argument is that low intelligence people gravitate to right wing ideologies, how is pointing out moronic behaviour from the left off topic?

Individual acts vs general tendency.

Individual acts that run counter to the general tendency don't disprove the general tendency.

We all know individuals do things we might find pointless or counter-productive.

Even one act by that individual doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

Their belief in something we disagree with (and action on that belief) doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

 

[mcnulty]

Individual acts vs general tendency.

Individual acts that run counter to the general tendency don't disprove the general tendency.

We all know individuals do things we might find pointless or counter-productive.

Even one act by that individual doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

Their belief in something we disagree with (and action on that belief) doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

 

[evolved2]

Oh, you identify as a rightie now?

Always right, yes.

Must be a relief after years of pretend centristing.

Left, right, don't really care how others view my political positions.

 

[evolved2]

Individual acts vs general tendency.

Individual acts that run counter to the general tendency don't disprove the general tendency.

We all know individuals do things we might find pointless or counter-productive.

Even one act by that individual doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

Their belief in something we disagree with (and action on that belief) doesn't prove them to be unintelligent generally.

How are you measuring this 'general tendency' statistically?

 

[Chief]

How are you measuring this 'general tendency' statistically?

Me? I am not measuring it.

Other people are. See sticky above and whatever else people have linked to in this thread.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

How are you measuring this 'general tendency' statistically?

Could probably use Sussan Ley as a yardstick.

 

[Chief]

Jessus!

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/why-sussan-ley-has-an-extra-s-in-her-name/news-story/4c2bb14f934012a810d2001682e2cc42

“I read about this numerology theory that if you add the numbers that match the letters in your name you can change your personality,” she told The Australian.

“I worked out that if you added an ‘s’ I would have an incredibly exciting, interesting life and nothing would every be boring. It’s that simple.

“And once I’d added the ‘s’ it was really hard to take it away.”

 

[Grin]

Jessus!

Poor bloke's probably weeping.

 

[Blue1980]

I'll come out slightly ahead over the next financial year assuming my partner and I don't sell any investments at profit. The money differential isn't my primary concern.

How do you intend to hold government accountable when you're comfortable with them breaking election promises? The next election is a long time to wait, and each political party can just as easily break their promises after. The cycle doesn't end.

They can, but there are proven promises and there are broken promises. It’s not like they didn’t deliver at all, they delivered 80-90%.

 

[evolved2]

They can, but there are proven promises and there are broken promises. It’s not like they didn’t deliver at all, they delivered 80-90%.

I wonder if you would have been equally forgiving of a broken promise that favoured people earning over $200k instead.

What do you think?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I wonder if you would have been equally forgiving of a broken promise that favoured people earning over $200k instead.

What do you think?

I believe he did break a promise that favoured people earning over $200k.

 

[evolved2]

I believe he did break a promise that favoured people earning over $200k.

I'm eagerly awaiting your red herring.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I'm eagerly awaiting your red herring.

Those $200k people will still be getting more $ back than those earning much less.

You'll still be able to afford smashed avo and caviar bro.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Jessus!

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/why-sussan-ley-has-an-extra-s-in-her-name/news-story/4c2bb14f934012a810d2001682e2cc42

“I read about this numerology theory that if you add the numbers that match the letters in your name you can change your personality,” she told The Australian.

“I worked out that if you added an ‘s’ I would have an incredibly exciting, interesting life and nothing would every be boring. It’s that simple.

“And once I’d added the ‘s’ it was really hard to take it away.”

I thought this was commonly known?

By definition being a “numerologist” means you are anti-science and this oxygen deprived freak was once Minister for the Environment.

What hope do we all have?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I'm eagerly awaiting your red herring.

Be a good landlord and charge your kids more rent to offset those unrealised tax gains you haven't lost.

 

[evolved2]

Those $200k people will still be getting more $ back than those earning much less.

You'll still be able to afford smashed avo and caviar bro.

Do you favour a tax system that gives more back to people earning 18k than those on $200k?

 

[evolved2]

Be a good landlord and charge your kids more rent to offset those unrealised tax gains you haven't lost.

I'm no longer a landlord. I'm reformed.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Do you favour a tax system that gives more back to people earning 18k than those on $200k?

Put the tax free threshold at 50k, and anything over 150k taxed at 49.9%

10 tax brackets between 50k and 150k.

 

[evolved2]

Put the tax free threshold at 50k, and anything over 150k taxed at 49.9%

10 tax brackets between 50k and 150k.

Did you come up with that all by yourself?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Did you come up with that all by yourself?

Correct. I'll also add, tax anything over 1 million/year at 99%

 

[evolved2]

Correct. I'll also add, tax anything over 1 million/year at 99%

I can't agree with any system that removes the incentive to achieve more.

How would you stop someone earning $999,999 from negotiating loopholes with their employer or moving overseas?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I can't agree with any system that removes the incentive to achieve more.

How would you stop someone earning $999,999 from negotiating loopholes with their employer or moving overseas?

You don't agree with the current system without some wishy washy pentecostal promises.

Which reminds me, I'd tax the churches as well. If they don't like it, they can go.

 

[ElectricG]

Put the tax free threshold at 50k, and anything over 150k taxed at 49.9%

10 tax brackets between 50k and 150k.

Sounds crap

 

[Blue1980]

I wonder if you would have been equally forgiving of a broken promise that favoured people earning over $200k instead.

What do you think?

Well no, as that wouldn’t be beneficial to the majority of the population.

That is what a government is supposed to do, serve the interests of the majority of the population.

If it was benefiting higher income earners more than lower income earners, yes that would be stupid.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Imagine being the person on $200k who bitched about struggling families and poor people being given some relief whilst also getting a $4k tax cut yourself.