Althouse: "What about low IQ and Liberal beliefs? Did the study link those to anything?"

January 27, 2012

"What about low IQ and Liberal beliefs? Did the study link those to anything?"

"Say, gullibility? Conformity? Susceptibility to cults of personality? Unhealthy narcissism? Vanity? Shouting down governors? Locking one's own head to gallery railings? Chanting? Drumming? Occupying? Incessant blowing of vuvuzelas? Did those questions make it into the study?"

81 comments:

Moose said...: narcissism - seems to be a common liberal characteristic.

Its funny to see Sully discussing it re: Newt. I guess its hard to see whats right in front of your face (nose?).; 1/27/12, 11:13 AM
Anonymous said...: There's some evidence that risk takers are more likely to be liberal - but this kind of data has too many inherent interpretation bias problems to be read politically.; 1/27/12, 11:15 AM
damikesc said...: Liberals are clearly smarter. It had to be a Republican who believed Guam would capsize if more troops were there.; 1/27/12, 11:15 AM
cubanbob said...: The study would have been more accurate if it studied the correlation between liberalism and insanity.

If forced to choose, which is the least bad choice to be governed by? The stupid or the crazy?; 1/27/12, 11:19 AM
edutcher said...: Funny how all these studies come to the same conclusions.

I'm waiting for the one that says it's an indication you're ugly and your mother dresses you funny.

Very insecure, these Lefties.

damikesc said...

Liberals are clearly smarter. It had to be a Republican who believed Guam would capsize if more troops were there.

Or Hawaii's part of Asia.

Or the Union Pacific and the Central Pacific formed the Inter-Continental Railroad.

Or Navy Corpsemen serve as medics for the Marines.

PS Well played, Meade.; 1/27/12, 11:24 AM
sean said...: There is a well-documented positive correlation between years of education and conservative beliefs, although most academics outside the sociology department would not know about it. (Not that sociologists are conservative, just that they are more likely to be aware of results of this nature.) Given that there is a correlation between IQ and years of education, it would be interesting to see if there is a correlation between IQ and conservative political beliefs. I have never seen such a study, which leads me to suspect that there is a correlation and researchers find the result unappetizing, so they investigate subsidiary topics where they can find results they like, as the researchers did here.; 1/27/12, 11:24 AM
Brian Brown said...: Reading the leftists pat themselves on the back in that comment thread was funny.; 1/27/12, 11:25 AM
Henry said...: The really funny line is the comment by pjbogart at 8:16:

"gullibility, conformity and hero worship are pretty standard conservative traits."

Unpresident McCain begs to differ.; 1/27/12, 11:26 AM
LarryK said...: Don't forget envy and resentment.

And above all, prejudice - otherwise known as "a preformed opinion, usually an unfavorable one, based on insufficient knowledge, irrational feelings, or inaccurate stereotypes."

Exhibit A demonstrating the persistence of this left-wing personality trait is the "study" in question.; 1/27/12, 11:27 AM
Brian Brown said...: "gullibility, conformity and hero worship are pretty standard conservative traits."

Right.

Which is why they spend so much time questioning the media narrative regarding Obama.; 1/27/12, 11:28 AM
Sorun said...: A hilarious response to Meade:

Even if what you suggest is true of liberals, these are all still advancement over the prejudice and racism embraced by the dummies on the right. That's why liberals are considered progressive.

Liberals consider themselves "progressive," which is a label invented by liberals embarrassed by other liberals.

Claiming "liberals are considered progressives" as some sort of independent fact is bizarre. But not surprising for a liberal.; 1/27/12, 11:31 AM
Brian Brown said...: Sorun,

I saw that one too.

Too funny.; 1/27/12, 11:32 AM
Scott M said...: "gullibility, conformity and hero worship are pretty standard conservative traits."

Absolutely hysterical. This is a person that was raised to believe that Hitler was right wing.; 1/27/12, 11:33 AM
shiloh said...: Althouse, your reply certainly indicates a conservative prejudice towards liberals ~ shocking!

And of course your daily, ad nauseam "projection" towards liberals as well.

Indeed, as you and your hero Limbaugh bring narcissism to a whole new level as Limbo tries to sell conservative ideology to his flock and you try to sell Althouse stuff lol.

take care; 1/27/12, 11:36 AM
cubanbob said...: "Even if what you suggest is true of liberals, these are all still advancement over prejudice and racism embraced by the dummies on the right. That's why liberals are treated cancer is also progressive progressive."

Untreated syphilis like cancer is also progressive.; 1/27/12, 11:37 AM
roesch/voltaire said...: A much more useful and insightful test is offered by Jonathan Haidt's test offered at www.YourMorals.org which shows the relationship between one's beliefs and social/political choices. Any claiming of my side has a higher IQ is just silly posturing.; 1/27/12, 11:38 AM
Orion said...: @Dave,
I wonder about that. Just anecdotally, almost every rugger I've played with, every Soldier I've served with, every SCUBA diver I've dived with, every Firefighter I've gone interior with, every pilot I've flown alongside, and almost every skydiver I've jumped alongside have all been conservative.

I'm thinking these are all risk-taking activities...My belief is that liberals like the appearance of risk, but avoid actual risk.

Orion; 1/27/12, 11:43 AM
traditionalguy said...: Watch it Sir Meade. You are denying settled science there.

So maybe we should change the tests for lower/higher IQs correlations to tests for "louder/quieter Voices in their heads" correlations.

Good comment.; 1/27/12, 11:46 AM
Scott M said...: I'm thinking these are all risk-taking activities...My belief is that liberals like the appearance of risk, but avoid actual risk.

Not really. Those are professional people, or at least very well-trained, doing dangerous jobs that are calculated risks.

Liberal risk-takers are more the type that will throw multiple billions at "shovel-ready jobs" only to find out there aren't any.

In the first example, those that you cite have a clue about what they are doing. Not so much in the second. Consequences don't matter as much to progressives as their original intent does.; 1/27/12, 11:49 AM
Henry said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/27/12, 11:55 AM
Henry said...: I think it's fairly well established that criminals tend to be stupid.

Criminals like to redistribute wealth.

Ergo...; 1/27/12, 11:56 AM
Anonymous said...: IQ? I thought the mere mention of the idea that intelligence could be measured was racist/sexist etc. and meaningless since intelligence is just too hard to define.

I wonder if the author controlled for race or gender?; 1/27/12, 11:58 AM
Brian Brown said...: LarsPorsena said...
IQ? I thought the mere mention of the idea that intelligence could be measured was racist/sexist etc

No Lars. See, IQ is "bad" only when you want to use it as a measure for college acceptance.

It can never, ever, be brought up in a discussion of race, only to "prove" conservatives are dumb.

Isn't that dandy.; 1/27/12, 12:01 PM
shiloh said...: btw Althouse, do you agree w/everything Meade says, or only when he's totally over the top in an inane hyperbolic, sore loser sort of way? Rhetorical.; 1/27/12, 12:02 PM
Amartel said...: Projection and more projection.
The comfortable status quo refuses to look in the mirror and report accurately on what it sees there.; 1/27/12, 12:03 PM
MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...: After I learned that the inventors of social science research created it solely for the purpose of destroying Judeo-Christian values -- because the inventors of social science research believed it is those Judeo-Christian values that have held Western civilization together and prevented the widespread acceptance of Marxism from taking hold, it's simply impossible for me to believe that ANY of it is ever done using truly objective scientific methods for the purpose of advancing knowledge.

To me, it's ALWAYS leftist political propaganda masquerading as pseudo-science.

Here's a long but interesting synopsis if anybody has the time or inclination:

http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/; 1/27/12, 12:06 PM
Tully said...: How does Hodson define "conservative" and "liberal?" What questions were used to indicate conservatism/liberalism? Same with "racism." I suspect more fuzzy BS attempting to pose as science. Psych studies are notorious for being poorly constructed on somewhat less than emprical foundations.

I've seen many such studies, and they all suffered from construction bias, at the very least.

Without seeing the original data and assumptions, there ain't no there there. And of course, the study itself is hidden behind a paywall, so we can't ven see how it was constructed, much less if the underlying assumptions are even included.; 1/27/12, 12:06 PM
garage mahal said...: It can never, ever, be brought up in a discussion of race, only to "prove" conservatives are dumb.

Nah, you prove that here daily on pretty much any subject.; 1/27/12, 12:16 PM
machine said...: Like the republican nominee who believes in magic underwear?

That kind of gullible?...is the nominee the gullible one or the person that votes for him?...; 1/27/12, 12:17 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: "Locking one's own head to gallery railings"

LOL.; 1/27/12, 12:24 PM
purplepenquin said...: Not that I'm picking on either set of beleifs but can someone tell me why some folks think that "magic underwear" is weird and twisted, yet also think that "virgin birth" makes perfect sense?

(And for the record, I ain't saying either beleif is wrong. I also ain't presuming anything about machine's beleifs...my question was inspired by his remarks rather than a direct response); 1/27/12, 12:28 PM
Scott M said...: That kind of gullible?...

No, the kind of gullible that would get people to sign a petition to ban or limit Dihydrogen Monoxide.; 1/27/12, 12:29 PM
edutcher said...: machine said...

Like the republican nominee who believes in magic underwear?

That kind of gullible?...is the nominee the gullible one or the person that votes for him?...

Maybe more like the Democrat who believes that Father Karl's ideas are viable.; 1/27/12, 12:30 PM
shiloh said...: ok, ok, Kucinich believes in UFO's whereas conservatives believe in illegal aliens. :-P; 1/27/12, 12:32 PM
machine said...: Virgin birth does not make sense either...btw...or communism...or trickle down...; 1/27/12, 12:33 PM
John said...: If being intelligent means actually believing that the way to prosperity is taxes and "investment" in "green jobs", I will take stupidity thank you.

Most liberals are dogmatic, pig headed, ignorant and prejudice against anyone who doesn't think exactly like them. When you look at how horribly reactionary someone like Garage is and take this study at its word, you are left with the conclusion that perhaps there is more to life than IQ because IQ doesn't seem to be buying liberals much beyond hatred and ignorance.; 1/27/12, 12:38 PM
Rusty said...: A hilarious response to Meade:

Even if what you suggest is true of liberals, these are all still advancement over the prejudice and racism embraced by the dummies on the right. That's why liberals are considered progressive.

Liberals consider themselves "progressive," which is a label invented by liberals embarrassed by other liberals.

Claiming "liberals are considered progressives" as some sort of independent fact is bizarre. But not surprising for a liberal.

Funny you should bring that up. Both Hitler and Mussolini were heavily influenced by American progressive writers. Hitler was especially enamored with Dorothy Sanger; 1/27/12, 12:39 PM
John said...: Machine,

Virgin birth makes perfect sense within the belief system that is Christianity. Whether you accept that system is really besides the point.; 1/27/12, 12:40 PM
John said...: Hitler was especially enamored with Dorothy Sanger

Considering what Hitler was out to do, with good reason.; 1/27/12, 12:45 PM
Amartel said...: "Not that I'm picking on either set of beleifs ..."

Why, no, of course not, don't be silly, you're picking on both.

Rube.

I'll take magical underwear over magical thinking any day.; 1/27/12, 1:00 PM
John said...: "I'll take magical underwear over magical thinking any day."

I like that line. If Mitt planned to base his entire domestic policy around finding the tree of life, I would worry about his religious beliefs. But we currently has a President who honestly seems to believe the entire country can be fed by a giant magical unicorn barbecue known as "green energy". It is just barking mad.; 1/27/12, 1:10 PM
Michael said...: Clearly the left has promoted the meme that liberals are smarter. And indeed many liberals are liberal because they believe that to be true. Without that believe, as profound as the old timey belief in a God, some of our commenters here would be left with the horrible truth.; 1/27/12, 1:15 PM
damikesc said...: I can't FATHOM why the soft sciences aren't considered to be rigorous academic disciplines. The work they churn out is of such a high level of quality.

But, hey, the writers likely are hurting. Patting yourself on the back is painful if you don't stretch first.

Did any government's funds go into this study? I think it's Canadian and I'd hate to think any government would fund this.; 1/27/12, 1:23 PM
DCS said...: I enjoyed James Taranto's take on this. From his "Best of the Web" column in the WSJ:

"So IQ tests are racist, except when they're used to "prove" that people with "socially conservative ideologies" are racist and intellectually inferior."; 1/27/12, 1:25 PM
shiloh said...: John w/an inane conservative Hitler deflection.

Why am I not surprised! :D; 1/27/12, 1:50 PM
shiloh said...: ok, Rusty was the 1st to deflect to Hitler as Althouse conservatives unite! against fascism er conservatism. :D; 1/27/12, 1:53 PM
Nora said...: Who decides what prejudice is? Does not quoted "research" feeds prejudices?
Is hating somebody for their opinions somehow intellectually superior to racism?

I'm not surprised that the same political spectrum that gave us eugenics and physical destruction of mentally returded is still at it.; 1/27/12, 2:15 PM
Scott M said...: "gullibility, conformity and hero worship are pretty standard conservative traits."

Absolutely hysterical. This is a person that was raised to believe that Hitler was right wing.

Apparently so was shiloh. For us stupid, bitter, clingers, shiloh, perhaps you can illustrate just how a tyrannical statist like Hitler was a conservative. Then, possibly, you can follow up with evidence that use of coercive violence to back up domestic policy is inherently right-wing.; 1/27/12, 2:33 PM
roesch/voltaire said...: Maggot I checked out your link and read this:
Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be true.
This ahistorical generalization that tries to reframe the notion of ideology is simply propaganda that can be checked by simply searching for the roots of conservative IDEOLOGY articles-- there are many.
I think liberals and conservatives like religious followers take many things on faith. For example Alan Greenspan was shocked to discover his ideology may have been wrong even as empirical evidence to the contrary was building. Ah but so many are gullible willing to believe out right lies--; 1/27/12, 2:46 PM
Scott M said...: Ah but so many are gullible willing to believe out right lies--

All well and good, but I'm going with the ideology that would rather be left alone to it's own devices rather than be forced, by that other ideology, to relinquish liberty after liberty while constantly swelling centralized control.

I'm fine with that, even if I have to take it on faith that I can look after me and mine.; 1/27/12, 2:51 PM
Rick67 said...: "Prejudice and racism".

A strong case can be made these are far more characteristic of the left.; 1/27/12, 3:11 PM
ed said...: Can I ask why you even bother to link to nonsense like that? You must know by now what the result is going to be right?

Seriously. If I really need a daily dose of idiotic liberal nonsense I'll just read WaPo.

TheDailyPage? Why bother with the scrubs when the major league liberal jackasses are just a click away at WaPo or Politico?; 1/27/12, 3:31 PM
ed said...: "A strong case can be made these are far more characteristic of the left."

Joe Biden doing the Gunga Din accent?

Hillary talking about Indians running 7-11's?

Lt. Gov (D-California) Cruz Bustamente talking about "n****rs" to an all black audience. <- really. remember that one?; 1/27/12, 3:33 PM
ed said...: @ roesch/voltaire

"I think liberals and conservatives like religious followers take many things on faith."

Really? Why do you think conservatives take anything on faith? What is the actual reasoning behind that statement?; 1/27/12, 3:38 PM
shiloh said...: "Can I ask why you even bother to link to nonsense like that?"

Indeed Althouse, as one of your conservative flock, ed, would prefer totally 100% positive conservative cause articles lol w/no reference to liberals whatsoever.

Which, in all fairness, is your daily routine w/an occasional deviation every couple years. :D; 1/27/12, 3:45 PM
Scott M said...: Really? Why do you think conservatives take anything on faith? What is the actual reasoning behind that statement?

Given the differences in charitable giving, it seems that liberals would rather "pay at the office" and put their faith in bureaucracies to use that money while conservatives would rather give money directly to the charities they choose...usually after being forced to pay at the office anyway.; 1/27/12, 3:48 PM
Alex said...: shiloh - I'm sure you'd be much happier on Daily Kos or Democrat Underground where all articles are GOP bashing.; 1/27/12, 4:03 PM
shiloh said...: Alex, which is why conservatives are extremely happy at this echo chamber. ie never a positive Obama article or negative mittens article. ok, ok, the Gingrich clan aren't happy! lol

Again, the yin and yang of everyone agreeing. :zzzz:; 1/27/12, 4:22 PM
Alex said...: shiloh - you could say the same thing about HuffPo/Kos/DU/TPM.; 1/27/12, 4:26 PM
Scott M said...: shiloh, are you a painter? You seem to have a good stock of broad brushes.

I do my time in liberal talk-backs and try to hold forth without slinging ad hominem or disparaging people. I come here because people here have a sense of humor, unlike the previously mentioned liberal talk-backs.; 1/27/12, 4:28 PM
shiloh said...: Alex, have you been to Huffington Compost lately where it's fairly equal and the conservative trolls are now totally entrenched to do battle er troll daily.

btw, only 5% of HP is political discussion ie

Politics
Business
Media
Entertainment
Comedy
Sports
Style
World
Green
Food
Travel
Tech
Living
Health
Divorce
Arts
Books
Religion
Impact
Education
College
NY
LA
Chicago
Denver

carry on; 1/27/12, 4:32 PM
shiloh said...: HP also moderates posts, which is a whole other discussion.

I digress.; 1/27/12, 4:35 PM
wildswan said...: Mainstream IQ research - which I reject - was funded by the Pioneer Fund and carried out by members of the various eugenic societies. It resulted in the thesis of the Bell Curve which was that African-Americans have lower IQ's for genetic reasons. This racist thesis is still the conclusion of most IQ research and for that reason IQ research is suspect. It seems to be just a stick to beat those you don't like.; 1/27/12, 4:38 PM
shiloh said...: 2008 I spent a lot of time at RCP and Politico which were heavily conservative at the time. Quite enjoyable.

But I hear Politico may be fairly even now in its political discourse, but haven't paid much attention to either's comment section for a longgg time.

>

Bottom line, you're better off going outside and exercising. Again, no social/economic/political issue is ever gonna be solved by blogging ...; 1/27/12, 4:40 PM
X said...: I suppose now that it will not have a disparate impact, the liberals no longer have a reason to oppose IQ testing for employment.; 1/27/12, 4:56 PM
Ralph L said...: resulted in the thesis of the Bell Curve which was that African-Americans have lower IQ's for genetic reasons.
If you're referring to Charles Murray's book, it's been years since I read it, but I don't believe your assertion is correct. He carefully avoided that conclusion, but the critics blasted him anyway.

If that alleged thesis were true, would it still be racist?; 1/27/12, 5:42 PM
wildswan said...: If you're referring to Charles Murray's book, it's been years since I read it, but I don't believe your assertion is correct. He carefully avoided that conclusion

Murray was making an ugly statement about genetics, IQ and African-Americans. Given his sources (who included Arthur Jensen and the rest of the Pioneer Fund grantees) he could not have done otherwise. The statement comes in a droning academic tone but it is clear. From many examples, here is one - "the most efficient way to raise the IQ of a society is for smarter women to have higher birth rates rather than duller women ...America is going in the opposite direction ... The implication is a future America with more social ills and gloomier economic prospects. These conclusions follow directly from the evidence we have presented ... The United States is encouraging the wrong women [to have babies]"; 1/27/12, 6:39 PM
Phil 314 said...: Like the republican nominee who believes in magic underwear?

No prejudice there.; 1/27/12, 7:37 PM
shiloh said...: "No prejudice there."

Indeed, just comedy! :D; 1/27/12, 8:08 PM
Ralph L said...: And what does your quote have to do with race, wildswan?

Do you believe there's NO genetic component to IQ? In your experience of the world, do smart parents tend to have smart children, or does it seem random to you?; 1/27/12, 9:02 PM
Synova said...: Oh wow... I read the other comments.

Perhaps the study should have asked if low IQ's were associated with an inability to see irony.; 1/27/12, 11:09 PM
Synova said...: "Any claiming of my side has a higher IQ is just silly posturing."

Just wanted to make a point of appreciating you saying this, RV.; 1/27/12, 11:13 PM
Milwaukee said...: Didn't African-Americans in this country vote like, 95% to 5% for President 0bama? Is that a cult-like following? Does that qualify as "conformity"? Or are they just Democrats? Like the town in North Carolina which couldn't get rid of party primaries because then the Blacks wouldn't know who to vote for in the general elections?(That's the reason given by the Justice Department official.); 1/27/12, 11:26 PM
Ralph L said...: Milwaukee, that explanation does even make sense. We have a straight ticket button here in NC.; 1/27/12, 11:49 PM
Ralph L said...: does not make sense....

And neither do I.; 1/27/12, 11:58 PM
Rusty said...: shiloh said...
ok, Rusty was the 1st to deflect to Hitler as Althouse conservatives unite! against fascism er conservatism. :D

1/27/12 1:53 PM

Which doesn't make it any less true. And, in fact, would give anyone curious enough an idea as to where to look for the roots of progressive policy. Which was, and always has been, racist at its core and wholly American in its makeup.
carry on.; 1/28/12, 7:13 AM
MarkD said...: On the bright side, this is proof that someone with a degree in the Social Sciences got paid for something other than "Would you like fries with that?"; 1/28/12, 8:20 AM
roesch/voltaire said...: Synova, yes one does not need a high IQ to be a productive citizen, or a good conservative or liberal, although I think folks tend to "believe" in their cause long after real politics have left it behind. Examples include Lenin on the left ( and many pre-cold war Marist) and Greenspan and others on the right. Most recently the belief that Gingrich, the prime force in polarizing politics by casting the other as demons, could become the president to bring congress to work together is another example of belief over history.; 1/28/12, 9:13 AM
Milwaukee said...: Ralph, you're right. I wasn't making sense. The syllogism "If p, then q" means that if p is present then q follows. The presence of q doesn't mean that p was around first. So the African-American community voting in a cult like fashion for 0bama has other explanations than the explanation of low intelligence which drives people to being conservatives.

The original paper "Low IQ and Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice" is a crock, the excerpts in the Isthmus, and the comments there just reinforce some harsh blanket statements which can be made about progressive-socialist-liberals. The occupy crowd seemed to be the type of group that this paper would claim was fueled by many members with low intelligence submitting to a socially hierarchical system.; 1/28/12, 10:12 AM
SGT Ted said...: Liberals in all 57 states were pleased with the results of the study.; 1/28/12, 10:49 AM
SGT Ted said...: There were huge swaths of intellectuals that supported Communist and Nazi/Fascist movements that considered themselves "progressives" and of the left.

There still exists many people with high IQs that think Marxism is great, despite the utter failure of every attempt in implement it and the resultant death toll in the millions where ever it has been tried. Not to mention the political prisons and Gulags. And suppression of Liberty.

What was that again about liberals and leftists being smarter?; 1/28/12, 10:56 AM