Why Liberals Are Smarter than Conservatives

As far as I understand it, the study demonstrate a proclivity to a certain trait in some people, and that such people is more likely to become conservative. But it doesnt say anything about their intelligence (it can't), just that people whose perception of the world around them is oversimplistic more conservative than those who dont... du'h, big surprise. That oversimplification makes for boring, dull persons in my opinion, but hardly "dumb" as the author gloats. Intelligence take many forms, and one is the hability to take quick decisions, and there, narrowminded, simplistic folks have an edge.

This remind me of Woody Allen solving the dilemma of an intelligent, bright kid beign conservative by making him have a tumor in his brain, that once removed allowed him to be liberal, to his family relief. In his case, it was an intelligent comment on how for many in our camp, it seems its easier to label the opposition as "dumb" rather than taking the effort to understand and defeat their arguments. I fear the author of this article lacks the depth of perception to see that.

...or maybe he mistakes a "M" with a "W".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now that right wingers have successfully demonized the word with the same root as 'liberty' and 'liberate', behold the birth of progressives. It may take another decade of FauxNews-ian style propaganda to demonize the word with 'progress' built right in it, but I hope by then ebough Americans will have been awakened to be fooled and herded like that. Being a raging 'moderate' myself, I see more shades of gray than black and white. As for the intelligence factor, I'll just defer to John Stuart Mill: "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people...it is true that most stupid people are conservative." I'm not sure I believe that, but it sure fits the topic...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This has to be the funniest thing I've heard in ages.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The article seems biased. But the experiment is interesting.

Maybe the results aren't necessarily an indicator of intelligence, but rather, the tendency to think critically and approach each new situation with an open mind. For example, Himmler, Goebbels, and some other fanatics might have been intelligent people, but maybe they wouldn't have done well on this test, relative to their IQs.

Also, could it just be an indication of dogmatic, extremist thinking? Suppose they were to separate the results into those with liberal/moderate views vs. extreme views, both left and right?

My thought has been that wing nuts tend to think emotionally and prejudicially, while liberals and moderates tend to think more rationally and logically. There is nothing rational about patriotism, religion, lust for war, and blind obedience to authority. They're all gut-level, emotional, upbringing-based things that you either have or you don't, like the love some people have for certain dog breeds or baseball teams.

That's why I often think it's futile for liberals to argue with wing nuts. They hope the facts and evidence will change their minds when, as the article suggests, the wing nuts already have their minds made up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This writer was making a point by using humor. Why would anyone take it serious as a study and get all bent out of shape? It was just funny

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... calling right wingers stupid fools?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"History has already shown that conservatives are suckers for "W." The letter has some kind of hypnotic effect on them, causing them to jab their index fingers at things..."

Thank you for your mischievious sense of humor, fine wit and mostly for bringing a smile to my face at this early hour. I wish every day could start with such a smile...
:o)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's the term that I prefer for "conservatives". According to the dictionary, conservative means to keep things as they are. Conservatives fear change. The neo-cons want to change things to keep in power, make themselves richer and
screw everyone else. They don't believe in democracy. They don't believe in "checks and balances". They violate their oath of office to "defend and protect the Consitution of the United States". They don't want to enhance the "general welfare" of all the citizens of the United States. They only want to protect their rich and powerful corporations and the ruling elite. It is time to impeach them and remove them from office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

.. now it makes sense!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Although liberals, myself included, are inclined to accept this recent study more easily than conservatives, and maybe too readily, there are a few other studies pointing in the same direction.

At least two fairly extensive studies, both using the big 5 personality inventory as a measure, found that the defining quality of liberalness was openness to ideas and experience. Liberals were defined by this quality, as much as conservatives were oriented toward convention and striving for order. Although the authors did not overgeneralize, other studies point to openness as a quality of the highly intelligent, e.g., professors. Also, openness has a high degree of correlation with the Myers-Briggs test quality of intuitiveness, which is more likely found among the gifted.

When you start to look at other variables, e.g., religiosity, knowledge of current events, demographics, etc., it seems likely true that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives. One issue, since the study was done among students, is that it was range-restricted. If similar studies were done on the entire population, the results might be more equivocal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't get it. Why are we all swallowing the basic determining point of the study i.e how do you define a liberal, and who did the defining? I mean, how do we know those students were liberals and conservatives? What are the criteria?

It's nice and convenient to get confirmation that we're smarter than them, we know that anyway, but they think the same thing about us ... strange eh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As some of these comments clearly show, a lack of humor is another conservative characteristic. No wonder the Faux "News" humor show failed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The experiment is very interesting and worthy of serious discussion. The delivery is a let down.

Could we not have had calm and quiet confidence that people on the left can handle uncertainty and ambiguity fairly well? Some people do think more deeply than others. Some others have a need to feel sure of things and therefore tend to shut out reality.

Read Janis and his theory of Groupthink.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If it wasn't just a joke, then a bunch of kids received a dose of iatrogenic radiation for no good purpose. which unfortunately does not surprise me.
After all we are all being dosed iwth deadly radiation all the time prom our "peaceful" nuclear power plants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Conservatism is a mintal illness that lowers the intelegence. These people need to be gathered up, and institutionalized.
For the sake of the world, and society, people who don't know the difference between a M, or a W, need help. We need to build the special hospitals.
Hey, I have heard Haliburten already has some contracts for some. The perfict place for people who don't know a M from a W.
Compassionate Liberalism

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just thinking aloud here: I think the study sample needs closer consideration.

As a college professor myself, one who is part of the "studies" camps (and, thus, those programs/departments ripe for accusations that we're brainwashing students to the left), it seems to me that the college students I've had who've described themselves as conservatives are well-skilled in "blindly pushing a button" because they seem to spend quite a bit of time "tuning out" in our classes as a point of emotional defense. In fact, I think said students take up the label conservative proudly in defense against classes that critically examine the position of the U.S. in the world, race, gender, class, sexuality, etc.

So, perhaps this is more of a pavlovian response of a particular kind of college conservative, rather than conservatives more broadly?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It does seem to me that the more insults and rhetoric cast towards conservatives only aids the same tunnel vision and arrogant bias that is so often associated with Republicans in office within the ranks of people who are supposed to be progressive.

What kind of progress is it when you become more like the thing that you hate?

It is a difficult time for all Americans right now. Fragmenting through slander and prejudice further reduces progress and change, I feel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Looking at the comments posted with regards to the story about the taser incident, it seems many progessives can not look at something rationally, but must jump to conclustions and are guided by their own biases.

The few voices who argued for critical examination of the situation were labeled facists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've always joked that conservatives were too lazy to think, but now I'm starting to feel bad. They can't help it, its 'how God made em'. All of those swirling whirling thoughts confuse them and the only thing that seems to help is voting poorly.

I saw a guy driving down the road with a bunch of conservative bumper stickers on his car, and one of them said "When in doubt, blame liberals". I don't think he understood the irony.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As others have noted, the conservative mind does not lack intelligence. It lacks right brain input to what is basically selfish cognition driven by the amygdala--the brain's fear center. Please see www.democraticcritique.us for the full argument.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...to be told what they want to hear. This is why Fox News is such a success.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As an educational theorist (critical pedagogy) who has studied the epistemological nature of intelligence, I can only say that intelligence or "smartness" has more to do with education and culture, in this study's case, than with genetics.

It is not that conservatives are genetically inferior intellectually; it's that their education either short-changed them on critical thought or that the peer group influenced their choices, which again falls back on a lack of critical thinking skills. Look at the conservative media.

Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are great examples of pundits who say things to elicit emotional responses, thus their success at luring working class white males into the conservative party.

The running joke that conservatives call it "from the gut" implies an emotional response means more to conservatives than a thoughtful response. (Stephen Colbert mocks this behavior every episode.) Emotional responses have little to do with statistical or intellectual substance. Emotional responses also cater to the self-serving ego.

My point is that to teach conservatives to think critically would transform them into "liberal" thinkers. Yet, many liberals and progressives have a superiority complex and refuse to engage conservatives in dialogue. Indeed, as I so often see, any "debate" becomes a head-butting game, which brings both conservative and liberal down to the same level. Liberals have difficulty engaging conservatives for some of the same reasons conservatives respond from the gut.

Most liberals lack critical thought in the area of real change. A liberal by definition may question policy and approach to governance, but they don't question the system. Liberals don't question the deeper significance of white patriarchal supremacy and power and how voting for a women or black president doesn't necessarily mean change. Women and blacks can still serve the interests of white male supremacy.

To be a change agent one must deconstruct the systematic controls that are embedded in every institution in america, from government to education to the grocery store we shop at. White male power infects it all, meaning, the only solution is to challenge that power structure, and I don't see many liberals or progressives who do that.

Most liberals vote for the lesser of two evils, thus perpetuating the white male power system. Most liberals would not consider a third party candidate or even a Democratic candidate who might more represent their values because the candidate appears unelectable. They vote for popularity rather than their own values. That is a lack of critical thinking skills and that is why nothing will change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Maybe the results aren't necessarily an indicator of intelligence, but rather, the tendency to think critically and approach each new situation with an open mind."

The test is unabashedly behaviorialistic. Where does critical thinking, or conclusions in the direction of critical thinking, come into play? This connection is precisely what underpins the author of the article's presumptuous gloating, because he assumes, as well as draws from poorly argued conclusions, that what this test is indicating is a mind-bogglingly complex phenomena we call intelligence (to say nothing of ideology or critical thinking about such topics). An open mind isn't necessarily about unproblematic, transparent thinking (as if there were such a phenomena). It's about affects too, which colour and direct our thinking as much as the much vaunted sovereign individual. How does one engage that in this kind of experiment? I say one doesn't.

It doesn't take an 8th-grade science student to point out that what is being correlated with intelligence (whatever the fuck that loaded word is supposed to mean in such a vague deployment as in this article) is an unreasonably small and particular relationship between (at most) muscle-reaction and visual perception. What the author wants to see in the results, and apparently the researchers, is a simple, even if preliminary, correlation between inoperable political identities (as if liberal or conservative, to those who perfer those terms, meant the same thing to everyone)---who's the control, a moderate?---and an even less operable notion of intelligence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Also, see HERE .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not only are liberals smarter than conservatives but I just finished a scientific test that proves conservatives are retarded! Can't go into specifics of the test right now, but rest assured it was conducted under the strictist scientific conditions. I even have a quote from one of America leading neurologists; "After observing Doggycuny's highly scientific test I can confirm his results PROVE conservatives are retarded. The results also indicate that incest, country music and Coors Light play a significant role in the development of ignorance in Americans from the south". So there! I rest my case. America's top neurologists and scientists and even astronaughts and Generals believe that 'conservatives are retarded and deserve to die.'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

.
If you think this article is outrageous lies and propaganda, watch Fox News for ten minutes. Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week of vicious lies and propaganda.

.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Worm
Weasel

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Smarter, more independent thinking people are usually more willing to question the status quo. And of course in america, the status quo is money money money. Usually liberalism is less big-money-friendly, so liberalism is derided by the entrenched money powers and their media outlets.

Most follow-the-leader types just buy the bull and believe everything the money machine tells them about how bad liberalism is! "gol dang libruls. wanna take all r free dums uway!" Who cares if Bush does the same thing? Fact dont matter because the whole system is based on making false assumptions and completely ignoring facts. Liberals can see this a bit better.

But there is still plenty of big money behind liberal views, and I can see that dynamic reflected in the general population. Your average liberal is smarter than your average conservative. But if that is how they see politics, then its like comparing a chimp to a baboon. The words "liberal" and "conservative" do not speak towards a persons views on power and the acquisition thereof! That's why politics is better represented by what you see on the political compass website

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...this just further perpetuates the false left/right-liberal/conservative paradigm that serves as an oh-so-effective divide and conquer strategy in this country. Labels are good for products that are bought and sold, not for people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They couldn't tell a M from a W, for Christ sake.
If you tell me conservatives are just as smart, and liberals are evil for pointing out the difference.
You wight check the may you think. You fine upstanding conservative.
I am able to think freely. My gut reaction is that conservatism makes smart people stupid. Liberalism opens the world to all the beauties and horrors this world has to offer. That makes you want to save the beauties, and fight the horrors. Destroying the beauties, and creating horror is what conservatism is all about. That's why we protest. That is why my real name is on this comment, and I try to put a streak of fire in every one.
I made sure my employer knew that his drug testing of me was unamerican, good idea, or not did not change the reality.
A'ss holes of the world, I'm out of hiding. Every liberal, come out with me and help enlighten the world. Show the conservatives the beauty being destroyed in their name, and the horrors created in their name. Maybe, a few of them, may learn to tell a M from a W.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All the time the "liberals" keep letting the "conservative" motherfuckers FUCK the country to DEATH ! Just last year, America FUCKING voted liberal and look what the FUCK we got ! More caving in to the rightwing like a bunch of pansies ! Better yet, they keep working on out-righting the rightwing !!! I'm sorry but there are NO such things as liberals in DC !!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't have many conservative friends my own age, but the one I do have is a philosophy major from the Sorbonne. He is waaaaay smarter than me when it comes to a lot of things. The older conservatives I know come from a working class background with not a lot of education.

There was an interesting study a few years ago where it tracked amygdala activity vs. the liberal and conservative brains. It made a lot of sense - we liberals get emotional about how people are treated, and the amygdala is our emotional center, as well as our memory archive.
http://tinyurl.com/2zz8np

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look, liberals may know a lot of stuff over the cons. However, the cons know how to frame the debate, stick to their ideas as much as possible, and stay united. The liberals? I'm sorry but their REFUSAL to acknowledge that framing and sticking to ideas DO MATTER and their DIVIDED status of false "moderate" vs social-only "liberal" will SHACKLE them to LOSER status in the forseeable future. In fact, they ALWAYS take the bait from the cons and allow themselves to be RAPED and FUCKED !! That's not smartness, it's called PATHETIC DEFEATISM !!!! The latte/limousine "liberals" need to be KICKED out of the party and replaced with populist progressive leaning ones !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even more 'alarming' about the divide among conservatives and liberals is the demographic divide by Republican versus Democrat voters. Startling to read some months ago (I think it was a Harpers piece...) how some interesting statistics separated voters by their donkey versus friendly elephant representation!
Such coincidences or interesting statistics were revealed in many factors that are ultimately reflective of a lack of education (usually and)or intelligence. Take for example the biggest Republican voter turnout occurred in regions where nearly the whole community shops at Walmart. Although I cannot rattle off the other startling stats (my mind tried to block out these scary truths).
I think this all boils down to, if I can think (if I'm smart enough or have had enough education to muster thought), then I will. If an AMerican today is not THINKING that it's government is doing much wrong to the world and to it's own citizens, then, again, there is little hope of ever seeing any thought mustered.

LAST THOUGHT:
Let's burn all the dummies for fuel, thereby killing elephants and uh...saving birds from oil with one stone!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to state the bleedin' obvious?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Conservatives are sociopathic control freaks. They always have to have the postition of power. Thats why most of your bosses are repuglicans.
It is easy to speak out for the values of people who have power over you.
To speak up for liberal values you often alianate business associates, and job contacts. You don't want to jeapordize your livelyhood.
I'm tired of giving into evil. Congress does it. Your town does it, you do it.
We take a f'cken to keep from being F'cked.
Lets not let the psyco idiots get their way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OK, I tend to have a good sense of humor. I usually like to think that I get jokes. But if this article is a joke, I wasn't able to tell at first. I thought, wow, the person who wrote this article is amazingly stupid. But if it is a joke, the author obviously used over-generalization itself to make a point that over-generalization is bad. The reason I wasn't able to tell at first that this was a joke (at least I hope it's a joke) was because I've seen extremely ridiculous articles on alternet including one about the movie 300 in which those who liked it were dismissed as extremely violent people who like to torture animals, and this article wasn't a complete departure from the other ridiculous articles. So I guess, my point is, if this is a joke, bravo, but if it isn't, I want to cry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

maybe they're not even capable of correctly answering the question of whether they are conservative or liberal?

And what about anarchists? are they conservative or liberal or neither? would it have been too complicated to include them in this study? is it too scary to consider that they have the most intelligence of all?

It's been my experience that the majority of self-described liberals are much more conservative than they believe they are. Westport Connecticut comes to mind. What a joke, just like this study. Intelligent people don't need such ego stroking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“The results are skemed!”

I wean skemed!”

“Dawn it!”

“Sowebody get we a beer!”

And if they love “W” so much, let's add a few (hopefully these aren't in the article as I couldn't wait to share):

The following has been proof read by liberals for "W/M" or "M/W" reversals:

“Women Last”

“What are you complaining about?”

“Where’s my beer?”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have you ever felt coerced to answer "Yes or no?” especially by an employer or someone who thinks they have some power over you? Even though some answers aren't simple enough to warrant a strict yes or no answer, might conservatives actually fear considering any position beyond their simplest?

The stereotype of liberals allows gray area thinking, whereas conservative stereotypes prevent any question, like religious influence, where the conservative’s beliefs aren’t open to debate, nor will they answer legitimate questions when confronted.

At least liberal (stereotypes) allow some openness, like the recent admission by many AlterNet posters that their love affair with Bill Clinton and Family is finally over.

I’ve often wondered how easy or difficult it would be to make a conversion, one from conservative to liberal or liberal to conservative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My grandfather had a dog when I was a younger liberal that always scared the crap out of me.

The dog would bark like an angry Barry Goldwater as I approached his space, a '65 Rambler on blocks under the oak tree the dog was chained to, that also doubled as a dog house and a dog food storage facility. I considered the dog in terms of the foaming viciousness by which I was attacked as a liberal in a conservative town. A conservative dog; ready to tear my arms off for having the gall to try to make it to the Rambler to fetch him a pan of food.

Once I mastered looking him in the eye, and ignoring the sea of foam slung from those nice white teeth, along with a few aggressive maneuvers on my part, that dog would hole up under the Rambler until I was well away from that pan of food.

He wouldn't share a bit of it with other dogs, especially other breeds, particularly effeminate ones, or females (bitches; >).

And after I mastered the dominate posturing, he piped down. He even learned not to bite the hand that fed him.

I have since met not less than a few really stupid people that acted like that dog, watching the Bushy tailed network to figure out whose hand to bite, listening with glassy eyes to a few dipshits on conservative talk radio to figure out who is trying to rob their dish, and crawling under the Rambler when someone calls them on the mat for snarling.

Not all of the conservative are stupid, but most of the stupid are conservative. Once a good handler teaches them that they aren't going to get whacked over the head with an old aluminum pan full of doggy bits, they come around.

Me thinks that perhaps if we just changed the letters, perhaps self proclaimed conservatives would fair better; or better yet, to little donkeys and elephants, with monkeys and jackals as new symbols of the kind of crazy way we identify a fiscal conservative that spends money like the Rambler will always be full, with a straight face.

Any way you slice it, our old dogs need some new tricks, a muzzle, and the ability to see in color.

Confused? So am I when I have to look twice now to see a white "W" on a black background stuck on the back of a Rambler, because more and more of those white on black stickers are "M"s now.

M as in moron; me or the prez - it no longer matters, because these days I'm liking my space under the Rambler. Seems I got here by being stupid. It's safe here and I don't have to pass silly tests, I don't have to spend a lot of time barking at a guy who’s just passing me an empty pan, and I don’t have to wonder why they turned everything upside down.

***sigh***

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But lookout!

I think you meant "look out!" You seem to be using a noun as a verb or whatever it's called.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This test seems almost identical to a test I was given for Attention Deficit Disorder. The only difference was that I was supposed to hit a button as soon as a one letter appeared and refrain from hitting the button when the wrong letter appeared.

It appears that more people with ADD are conservative. Don't wanna think too hard I guess, go with what SOUNDS good. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is an idiotic "article".

Those of you who may actually believe this stuff should stop on over at the Jim Hightower article posted today here on AlterNet. Given that most farmers, ranchers and other animal raising country-folk would be considered "conservative" by most of you (illustrated by the many derogatory comments about rural people here on AlterNet), you might be surprised that they rallied, organized and fought the NAIS largely, I'm willing to bet, without the help from on high, by so-called "liberals". Who knows, maybe I'll lose the bet...

Anyway, as I've stated elsewhere, most intelligent people I've known don't even use the narrow paradigm of "liberal/conservative" , anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That explains why Conservatives have had their way with this country for the last 8 years. "Bush is an idiot", "Rethugs are knuckle draggers", "red neck miscreants", etc.

They very well may be all of that but they own your dumb asses, don't they?? They have allowed their corporate buddies to run amok. Anyone have a gander at interest rates lately? Yep, Bernanke & Co. have bailed out Wall Street and chipped away at your dollars. They're sneering in derision at all of you.

Let's be very clear about something. Bush, much to the delight of his buddies in Big Oil and Big Defense, has managed to entangle us in 2 wars and possibly another. What have Dems done? Bent over and taken it time and again. You've taken it over and over and over and will continue to do so when a "smarter" Democrat lubes up and puts it to you for another 8 years.

You're the idiots, not Bush. He will walk away from this Scott Free and retire in Paraguay while we're left holding the bag. So, keep reveling in your smug sense of superiority while Bush sneaks your wealth out the back door. DAMN FOOLS!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Agree 100% with the article. Conservatives are NOT stupid, they are simply narrow-minded, dishonest, and obedient. They can't think for themselves and they need to be led. Those are mostly religious people who would ignore or be blind to reasons (thus "Assalt on Reasons" as Al Gore said) in order to be able to exercise their "faith" in an unknown entity. Their ignorance of reasons often makes them hypocritical and they themselves don't even know it because they've been conditioned not to reason, thus not recognizing hypocrisy. Thus, you got all those Republican Senators who attack gay and are gay themselves or preach family values and commit adultery. But it's ok for them because they don't see the hypocrisy or inconsistency in reasoning (Duh! They don't reason for god's sake). Thus, not able to see hypocrisy leads them to being dishonest because they think it's not. They said they support the troops but they voted against the bill that would let the troop recuperate after their tour of duty. They actually support the war, not the troops, but of course they don't see it that way because they can't differentiate the two. You can call that stupidity but it's not an accurate discription. It's more like illogical as Spock would put it. Last point, if you name a top university or science institution, 99% of the time it is on either the west or the east coast where the color is blue, where reasons exist. That's why we have neo-cons and not a lot of neo-liberals. You are either liberals (open-minded) or you are not. There's no such thing as neo-liberal. There are neo-cons because those people are actually cons who set out to manipulate the idiots who can't reason. As they say, if you can't think for yourselves, the neo-cons will think for you. When they finish with you, they simply vanish (Rumsfelt, Rove, Wolfowitz etc...) What we have left is the 25% or so who would ignore all reasons in order to support George Bush. Those 25% would probably execute all detainees, deport all illegal or (legal but non-white for that matter) immigrants, bomb Iran, and oh yeah, Rapture wu hu... beautiful...love them conservatives. What a waste!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think it is much too generous to conservatives, but a good read:

Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., & Gosling, S. D. The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind. Invited resubmission (Political Psychology).

pdf

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberals hate the very idea of group think and the last thing they want is to be like everyone else. Where as conservatives thrive in group think and want to be like everyone else. This is why they like people who tell them what to think, (religion, politicians, radio hosts). Why do you think so many conservatives listen to the radio instead of going to the internet like liberals, they don't want to have to seek out information.

Unfortanetly the latter will always win out, because they are organized. At some point you just have to let them make life crappy for themselves and move to canada. Did you know Canada's central bank is government owned. It is not privately owned like ours and the interest goes back to the government. Don't understand, then you better watch money as debt, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

Have you ever worked for a corporation that strives for group think, you find out real quick which one you are. I found out I was a free thinker and corporations do not like free thinkers because they might speak out or not tow the line because they don't have an urge to be part of the group so the normal control mechanisms don't work.

Good luck fellow free thinkers, we are not organized and never will be, it goes against our nature. Therefore we can only hope for a real democracy, where everyone votes instead of just the well organized.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the only thing sillier than this article is the hysterical, smug, hyperbolic reaction to it from typically arrogant and elitist Alternet readers and commentators - you silly Leftists can keep patting yourselves on the back for being so sophisticated - and we Conservatives will continue defending this country, making the U.S. economy the biggest and strongest in all of human history, and winning the White House

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A'ight, luberals, lets play. First of all, it's amazing that somebody takes this as a serious proof of luberal superiority. Let me ask a few probing questions, kids...

First of all, we all know that young people are more liberal than older ones. You all know the reasons - students graduate, get jobs, buy houses, get married, and, most importantly, they start PAYING for the luberal policies from their own pocket. And this personal experience changes everything, you know. It's one thing to read about taxes in the books - it's another to actually be forced to take a big chunk of one's own money and give it the guvinmnent. Now, the question #1 is - is the group tested representative of the whole US population? Aha. Ahm. Say, a smart kid, goes to college, becomes a uber-luberal, while a dumb kid, goes to college, and is a conservative. A smart kid graduates, gets a life - and SWING, becomes a conservative. A dumb kid, bails out of college, cannot find a job, drags alone, gets government handouts - becomes a luberal. Would the testing actually catch this transformation? Nope.
Second - was the test representative of the student population? It's no secret, that conservatives tend to go to, say, somewhat dumber departments - physics, math, engineering, while the luberals tend to choose much more challenging English majors, sociology, methaphysics and fundamentals of homosexuality. Now, was this taken into account? Ahm.
Before you guys all go nuts, let me quickly give you some statistics. In 2000 presidential elections, CNN analyzed the voters by income. Not suprisingly, the more a person was earning - the more likely he was voting for Bush. Dirt poor boys - solid dems. Guys making a 100k - republicans. Kinda makes you think - if you luberals are so smart, why are you so poor?
I hope you are still there, kids. Now, here a few more quick questions for you all. For one - why were such tests given to the students? Why not the IQ test? Moreover, can there be any corelation between how much a student plays video-games - and how well he does on this test? Ahm? I mean, if an imbecile, who spends 10 hours a day playing Quake can beat a quantum mechanics major in this test - I mean, does not it prove that the test is measuring something other than intelligence?
Lastly, before you start typing your pathetic responses - here is the last question on the test. Do you think that this test should be used during employment interviews? Should it play a role in the university admission procedure? Ahm? And if you were hiring folks to work for you - how much weight would you put on the results of these tests? I know, these questions are too emotional, a real intellectual question would be - how can the luberals, who are so smart and goodhearted share this nice planet with evil dumb conservatives? Ay?

And now a question to all those free-thinking luberals questionning the status quo. Do you guys ever question the moral and economic reasons for your support of compulsory government pension system (Social Security and Medicare), government handouts (foodstamps, welfare, medicaid, "affordable housing") and the score of rules and regulations we have today? I mean, if you want to challenge authority - heck, try convincing the local government that when a man wants to fix his own house, he should not be forced at gun point to beg permission from the government.
All right, I guess I pissed you all off. Now it's my time to listen to your replies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...this kind of hubris is self-defeating. To illustrate:

"- Excuse me, but are you a superior person?
- I beg your pardon?
- Oh, I'm sure you'll understand. We're making a census of all the really patriotic people - the right sort of people, you know - of course you understand what I mean - so would you mind giving me your word? - and signing here, please - that you are a superior person - that's all we need to know..."

DH Lawrence, Canvassing for the Election

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"science has confirmed” ... until the next study comes along. Legitimate science uses a process that builds upon levels of proven results, later discards some of those results in order to build upon a new thesis, and so on. I think both sides tend to think inside the box. Overall, though it is difficult to accept, Liberals and Conservatives each can have valuable qualities needed to run a society which can evolve into something better. The only way America is going to lick its problems is to use the Right and the Left side of the brain in harmony.

Robert Lightfoot

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The article was a tongue-in-cheek joke.

It's not a real study.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do you think Einstein or Newton would have done this test better than a 10 year old kid, who plays computer games all day long?
I hope this question will not exceed the limits of your self-professed highly critical and deeply original thinking...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alas, the W's and the M's study could not include the variable of which study group has the least sense of humor. It might be a toss up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those toward the liberal end of the spectrum tend to prefer thinking for themselves, while those toward the conservative end of the spectrum prefer to have their thinking done for them. This explains everything from Republican "talking points" and a strict party line, to a right-wing agenda in which loyalty is more important than talent or virtue. I'd much rather be governed by Democrats in disarray than Republicans in concert. It's a whole lot safer for everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't think that conservatism leads to dumbness. I think dumbness leads to conservatism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Articles like this depress me. Not because I don't get the humor; it's because I do and I still don't think it's funny.

Arrogance was supposedly the reason why people chose Bush over Gore in 2000--Al Gore even made fun of it in an opening speech on Saturday Night Live (that was pretty funny actually). But the fact of the matter is that these so-called 'dumb' people made a choice that effected the entire world. So despite our 'superiorness', we still lost.

Bringing people into the fold should be the order of the day and the main focus of progressives. Most people want clean air, safe environs and good relations with their neighbors--internationally and otherwise. The devil is in the details--how to get those things done in a way a majority of folks can agree on.

Articles like this do nothing to further that agenda. I've seen intelligence get thwarted by mere pettiness so many times it makes me nauseous. Wise up, people!

And please, Alternet: The mix is the message, right? I mean, if you only want one point of view, why have comments at all?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Why then you want the government buerucracy to be responsible for your retirement, medical care and the like?"

Essential services must be in the hands of the people, which means they must be under the control of the government.

Of course, a true critical mind would ponder some obvious questions. For one, we don't have artificial intelligence - so all services will be in the hands of the people. If we let people keep their money, and let the government stay out of this, the people will control those services - individually. Why would the government buerucrats be better guards of our interests than the people themselves? Moreover, how much control would an individual have over his own retirement and medical care - if the government forces him at gun point to surrender his means to do so? And which service are to be considered "essential"? What is the actual standard by which you judge which services are "essential"? Somehow, I doubt you have asked any of those questions. After all, American luberals are not know for their ability to ask hard questions.


Allowing individuals or corporations to control these services has the effect of legalizing extortion against the people.

So, when the government comes to my house, puts a gun to my head and takes my money - "it's for your own good, we will take care of you when you get old, when you get sick, when you get hungry" - this is not extortion. But when I buy these services out of my owne volition from the people I personaly choose, and when I can drop them the very moment I believe they are not acting in my interests - this is what you call "extortion". Ahm. Well, would you care to explain? I mean, it's not like the government has dealt well with our pension money, you know. It's all spent. Enron is an example of perfectly honest business compared to the way the feds dealt with our pension money. But then - who am I to sue in this case? There is no one. I hope this info did not overload your registers...

Law enforcement, justice and penalty, water, electricity, food, health care, help for the disadvantaged and elderly, and general redistribution of wealth for social stability, among many others are all vital governmental interests.

Hardly anyone would argue that law enforcement, justice and penalty should not be under the government control. But what about the rest? Why can't I (or even you) be allowed to care for myself when it comes to all the rest? Medical care, pensions, food - why are you so afraid of being allowed to keep your own money and having to trade with other people? Are you really that dumb that you need the government to do this for you? That's one independent thinker.
As for the "wealth distribution" by the government - I would want to know why you think this legal theft provides for society's stability? Why, tell us...

We know this despite the hundred year old corporate propaganda campaign which has so fooled the conservatives because we think for ourselves and they don't.

Don't mistake knowing something for believing in something. So far you only showed a blind belief in century's old prejudices against liberty.

Socialism is a very good idea slandered by an army of professional liars in the employ of the plutocracy. It takes an independent mind to realize that.
Yes, only a mind independent from reality would claim that socialism, a system which proved to be a horrible disaster on many levels - from individual liberty and democracy to people's welfare - is a good system. Have you ever read a book on the subject? There was more than a century of debates and 90 years of experiments - and all conclusively proved that socialism is a vile idea - why do you ignore this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Luberals don't joke about issues lilke these.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We might add that most of the Nobel Prizes are awarded to Blue Staters while Red Staters hold the distinction of having the vast majority of people in the US who think the world is only 6,000 years old and that it was created in six days to boot. There are brilliant people from the South (C.W. Mills was from Texas) and morons from the North (The Bush Familiy was originally from Conneticut) so culture wars are counter productive for progressives.

I have heard, however, of IQ tests administered to liberals and conservatives and the liberals come out ahead. This is because liberals think outside the box and realize the vast complexity of the world whereas conservatism is usually all about uncritically following authority and reacting more emotionally than thoughfully. I would say that conservatives are more primal while liberals are more cerebral. I listen to progressive and right wing talk radio (as long as I can stand it!!) and find the right wing callers stupid, uninformed, racist, and inarticulate. The liberals are usually the exact opposite whether formally educated or not. Is this just a coincidence?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a stupid article. Number one...liberals could not possibly be smarter.....more mushy headed and believe they "care more"...no way they are smarter....witness what has happened to the dumbocrat party. They have all turned into robots.

By the way...I just LOVE the rules here.....

"NO PERSONAL ATACKS ON OUR WRITERS OR READERS"
that's code for "only if you agree with our left wing liberal whacko ideas will we print your comment."
Politcal correctness at it's finest....and we all know political correctness is just a form of free speech stifling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Link

I mean, without your superior IQ's those criminals that gang stomped a kid unconscious might not have hundred dollar bills to put in their mouth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]