Why Liberals are Smarter than Conservatives

Satoshi Kanazawa explains:

It is difficult to define a whole school of political ideology precisely, but one may reasonably define liberalism (as opposed to conservatism) in the contemporary United States as the genuine concern for the welfare of genetically unrelated others and the willingness to contribute larger proportions of private resources for the welfare of such others. In the modern political and economic context, this willingness usually translates into paying higher proportions of individual incomes in taxes toward the government and its social welfare programs. Liberals usually support such social welfare programs and higher taxes to finance them, and conservatives usually oppose them.

See, he starts out with a false premise. “One” may “reasonably” define liberalism as a concern for others? I could define it as a misguided concern for others in a superficial way that doesn’t lead to any meaningful improvement in the welfare of others.

See, this is the main problem with liberals. The only thing that matters are the intentions. The results of their oh-so altruistic concern doesn’t matter. Whether government and the social welfare programs actually improves the lives of others is irrelevant.

Kanazawa goes on to explain that liberalism is evolutionary. Humans were programed to only care about their kin, but liberalism developed so that man cared about others. Oh, they just care. So. Much. Then she goes on to state that “samples” (no supporting data) demonstrated that intelligent children are more likely to grow up to be liberals.

For example, among the American sample, those who identify themselves as “very liberal” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 106.4, whereas those who identify themselves as “very conservative” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 94.8.

Yea. Ok. I’m sure there is no bias in THAT sampling. Moving on.

So how do this more intelligent folks demonstrate their evolutionarily advanced caring? By paying taxes of course! No, really, he said that.

The primary means that citizens of capitalist democracies contribute their private resources for the welfare of the genetically unrelated others is paying taxes to the government for its social welfare programs.

How does he deal with the tricksy fact that it is conservatives, not the genetically superior liberals, who give more to private charity? Oh, the big brain has an answer for that as well:

Individuals can normally choose and select the beneficiaries of their charity donations. For example, they can choose to give money to the victims of the earthquake in Haiti, because they want to help them, but not to give money to the victims of the earthquake in Chile, because they don’t want to help them. In contrast, citizens do not have any control over whom the money they pay in taxes benefit. They cannot individually choose to pay taxes to fund Medicare, because they want to help elderly white people, but not AFDC, because they don’t want to help poor black single mothers. This may precisely be why conservatives choose to give more money to individual charities of their choice while opposing higher taxes.

By, picking the charity of their choice, their demonstrating that they don’t really care about “the other.” They only care about “others” of their choosing. That conservatives may pick charities that don’t waste money, that serve an under-served population, or that are particularly effective never enter into the thought process of Satoshi Kanazawa – genetically superior individual. And, of course, completely ignored is the fact that liberals DO choose who they help. By voting. They vote in leaders who are going to financially support who they want.

He does admit that the conservative are correct in their accusations about liberals being in control of the major institutions that are able to sway public opinion. Because why? You know why.

Liberals do control the media, or the show business, or the academia, among other institutions, because, apart from a few areas in life (such as business) where countervailing circumstances may prevail, liberals control all institutions. They control the institutions because liberals are on average more intelligent than conservatives and thus they are more likely to attain the highest status in any area of (evolutionarily novel) modern life.

In a response, Shawn T. Smith blasts the research that support Kanazawa’s assertions and then goes on to criticize his entire profession of psychology for being biased.

See this is why I don’t trust shrinks.

Psychology, which is unquestionably dominated by liberals, has developed an ugly habit of falsely maligning the political right. Through respectable-looking “research” we sling mud with flawed data and tendentious methodology (see here, for example).

These bogus studies build on each other to create an inbred, incoherent body of literature that will be cited with unquestioning faith by the next conservative-bashing researcher.

This stuff is over a year old, but it was linked by National Review and I got reading, yada yada yada.

But then it brought me to this article about Narcissists and I was wondering if this sounded familiar to anyone:

A cross section of the narcissist’s ego will reveal high levels of self-esteem, grandiosity, self-focus, and self-importance. They think they are more physically attractive and intelligent than just about everyone, and would rather be admired than liked. They are enraged when told they aren’t beautiful or brilliant but aren’t affected much if told they are jerks.

Oh, but there’s more.

Odious as these qualities may be, we’ve all got a narcissistic streak within. Narcissism is a stable trait that varies in degree from person to person. Some aspects, including confidence and self-sufficiency, are healthy and adaptive. It is only at the extreme end of the spectrum that narcissism becomes a disorder, often because toxic levels of vanity, entitlement, and exploitativeness are on display.
****
Narcissists thrive in big, anonymous cities, entertainment-related fields (think reality TV), and leadership situations where they can dazzle and dominate others without having to cooperate or suffer the consequences of a bad reputation.

Anyone come to mind?

Because control is so important to narcissists, they can abruptly lose their charm if destabilized or threatened. This two-faced behavior is often the first clue to their true character. They get angry when rejected, overreacting to small slights and punishing those who do not support their grandiose image of themselves. One study even found that when spurned, highly narcissistic individuals “punished” other research participants who had nothing to do with the rejection itself.

Ok, I’ve given you enough hints. You should know by now!

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

6 Comments on “Why Liberals are Smarter than Conservatives”


  1. In a response, Shawn T. Smith blasts the research that support Kanazawa’s assertions and then goes on to criticize his entire profession of psychology for being biased.

    See this is why I don’t trust shrinks

    I remain convinced that it is largely nonsense. When I read how the classification of homosexuality was changed in the DSM, that pretty much sealed it for me on the lack of credibility in the profession.

  2. Car in Says:

    I think for me it was when the child psychologists starting convincing kids they had been abused, when they hadn’t.

  3. veeshir Says:

    The “self-esteem” drive is what bothered me.

    Nobody can ‘give’ you self-esteem, you earn it.

    The narcissist thing is spot-on. Northern VA is pretty darn liberal and I have long called it “Narcissus central”.

  4. Car in Says:

    Doed the self-esteem “drive” encourage narcissism? I wonder. Or perhaps just narcissistic behavior.

  5. veeshir Says:

    Magic 8-ball says…. “Signs point to yes”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: