How Liberals Misuse Science to Further Presumed Intellectual Superiority to Further Their Political Goals
This is another post related to my previous post about how people who hold an unconstrained view of human nature and the lengths to which they will go to force their views and policies on the whole of society. Unfortunately, this one is a little long, but that is only because I took the time to do some research and put it all together for you. I hope you will at least consider my case.
I’d like to start by asking whether or not you have seen this story yet?
“We do not assert that conservatives fail to engage in effortful, deliberate thought,” they insist. “We find that when effortful thought is disengaged, the first step people take tends to be in a conservative direction.”
This, in spite of – or more likely because of – the consistent evidence which suggests talk radio audiences are far more engaged in active reasoning than the liberal TV audiences. Industry research suggests the talk radio audience is better informed and – on the whole – better educated than the audiences of their liberal counter parts in TV. It is also much more diverse than the average liberal is aware…or will admit. Just the fact that radio requires active reasoning from the listener by its very nature as opposed to passive absorption from the TV watcher is an indicator of the intelligence level of the talk radio listener. Throw in the sheer size of talk radio audiences and the grossly disproportionate weight of those being conservative and…
But maybe you saw this story?
“Conservatism and cognitive ability are negatively correlated … At the individual level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with SAT, vocabulary, and analogy test scores. At the national level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with measures of education … and performance on mathematics and reading assessments.”
These are the same liberals who, when dealing with inner city or ethnic minority children, will tell you their lower test scores are not a function of lower intellectual abilities, but of the cultural differences which – according to these same liberals – is an indication of test biases, not mental inferiority (see also here for inner cities, and here for racist testing).
Now, do you suppose the liberals might be trying to make connections between lower intelligence, conservatism and a distrust of science? Do you suppose that, since they know more people are starting to look at science as though it is a source of perfect answers which can never be wrong, these liberals might try to convince people that conservatives distrust science because they have lower mental capacity? And if they can make this argument stick, that they might then claim that this means “liberal” policy should triumph over conservative policy? Did you catch the subtitle in the second story link?
Or is it possible that conservatives have just caught on to how the liberals use and abuse science to push their political agendas? Because, if this is the case – as the data appears to suggest it may well be – then that would actually be a sign of something much more important than intelligence: wisdom and understanding.
The link between liberal leanings and education in America has been established for a long time:
“The positive relationship between higher levels of education attainment and social political liberalism (especially tolerance) has been one of the most stable and consistent findings in empiracl social research of contemporary American society. The relationship has been established from at least the 1950s to the 1970s… establish that education produces large and lasting good [by which they mean liberal] effects in the realm of values.”
If you pay attention to the news, especially those in the left-leaning “main stream media,” you have no doubt noticed that these self-appointed elites simply assume that education and liberalism go together. They also imply that there is a direct correlation between intelligence and education. The fallacy in all of this is that education does not equate to intelligence, nor does intelligence indicate education, and either education nor intelligence guarantee wisdom and understanding.
Here’s a problem with this liberal line of reasoning: it is essentially the same argument these liberals made to “prove” blacks were inferior to whites in the eugenics craze during the 1920’s and 30’s. They tried to use science to “prove” whites were the superior race, and now they are trying to use science to “prove” they are the mentally superior to conservatives and, as a result, they should be given authority over society to implement their ideas. Basically, this is an attempt to say “see, the science says I’m smarter, that means my ideas are better.” But history and experience repeatedly prove the ideas of the liberal left do not work. They fail every time they are tried, it’s just that it usually takes a generation or two for that failure to occur. Thus, the liberals pushing their ideas never have to pay the consequences for their failures. This is why I repeatedly caution people against accepting that science cannot make mistakes. It isn’t that science makes mistakes, per se; it’s just that science is a tool and – as with any tool – the people using it can and do make mistakes. Here, let me show you how easily we can discredit this liberal argument about conservative intelligence by using an obvious example that all of us should already be familiar with.
It is well know that many of the founding fathers were very intelligent men (I trust I do not have to spam this post with links to support this claim). They were also very well educated. And yet, these intelligent, well educated men were what we would consider today to be “extreme right wing conservatives.” What’s more, they were extremely moral men, another trait solidly connected to conservative beliefs. So, any student of American history can look back and find enough evidence to undermine these supposedly “scientific” findings which supposedly “prove” conservatism inferior to liberalism.
But we have more indirect evidence to suggest conservatives are no less intelligent, educated or successful than liberals. Consider the following information:
“The trend seems to be (albeit simplified) that if you have money but no education you lean conservative, but if you have education but no money you lean liberal.
Of course, the question is always causality, as correlation just starts the conversation.”
At first glance, these figures do not seem to support the claims from the earlier stories I linked to. In fact, as people make more money, they tend to lean farther and farther to conservatism – especially among those who do not have degrees higher education. So why might that be, simple because they are rich and greedy as liberals would be want to claim? Well, even if this is true, are we to believe that “dumb” conservatives are succeeding this much more than the supposedly “smart” liberals? Or is it more likely that those who are truly intelligent see no need for “education” and go straight into making money by building wildly successful businesses. After all, neither Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Rush Limbaugh had a college degree before they became successful and – say what you will – none of these men lack intelligence.
So what explains the link between education and liberal leanings? Simple: in our society today, education actually means indoctrination. Anyone who has read John Dewey (on public schooling), Woodrow Wilson (on college education) or William Ayres (to show the beat goes on still today) is well aware that liberals see our schools as a means of socially engineering our children into their ideal of the model citizen. Heck, this is exactly what Wilson and Dewey said their goal was for our schools and colleges. And they have succeeded in large part. If you will look, you will find that, just because someone is going to college, it does not mean they are more intelligent, or that they will even be educated by their professors:
“Previous surveys have found that, in general, college does not bring students up to a high level of civics knowledge. According to the institute’s 2008 report, based on a survey of 2,500, people whose highest level of educational attainment was a bachelor’s degree correctly answered 57 percent of the questions, on average. That is three percentage points lower than a passing grade, according to the survey’s authors”
Did you see this?
Or any of Sean Hannity’s “Man on the Street” segments with the “liberal” New York population? No, education has less to do with intelligence and more to do with the belief system that you adopt as a result.
But, as I pointed out, intelligence is not the same as education. So some might argue that intelligence is still correlated to liberal leanings. The problem is, even as many of these self-professed “intelligent elite” busy themselves with studies designed to affirm their pre-supposed conclusions, they miss the reality that intelligence has no correlation to wisdom. From the American Sociological Association:
This article is intended to prove liberals and atheists are more intelligent, as it clearly states for itself:
“The article “Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent” will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly, a publication of the American Sociological Association.”
But is that what it “proves,” or does it provide the very evidence necessary to undermine this claim at the very start of the paper?
“More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.
“Evolutionarily novel” preferences and values are those that humans are not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of years are “evolutionarily familiar.”
If these supposedly “superior intellects” are admitting they hold “unnatural” preferences and values, doesn’t that actually undermine their glorified theories of natural selection and evolution? After all, if they are trying to force an unnatural set of traits into a system that they admit humans are not designed to have, and they admit these traits are “unnatural,” then why are they “superior” as this paper is want to suggest rather than aberrations that will either go away or which society has just cause to eradicate? For supposedly “superior intellects,” these people seem to have missed the fact that they just provided the argument against these “unnatural” traits, which undermines their claim to superior intelligence in turn.
No, the more likely suggestion is that those with liberal leanings are no more intelligent than any other part of the population, they have just been indoctrinated to think so and, now, they are all standing around repeating their unsupported claims and pumping our “studies” pre-determined to yield the result they want. It’s like a cabal of furbies standing around congratulating each other for having congratulated each other.
Then again, it is possible that this Doctor is correct: liberalism is a mental disorder:
The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness
By board certified forensic psychologist, Dr. Lyle Rossiter
An excerpt from his book:
“The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave. To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom. Given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on character development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness. [these are the “unnatural” values mentioned as evidence of liberal superiority in the previous link/story] Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends. Only an irrational man would want the state to run his life for him rather than create secure conditions in which he can run his own life. Only an irrational agenda would deliberately undermine the citizen’s growth to competence by having the state adopt him. Only irrational thinking would trade individual liberty for government coercion, sacrificing the pride of self-reliance for welfare dependency. Only a madman would look at a community of free people cooperating by choice and see a society of victims exploited by villains.”[And thus, Dr. Rossiter affirms my argument and that of Thomas Sowell’s that those who hold an unconstrained – or liberal – world view feel compelled to rule everyone else in society] [From The Liberal Mind; The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., MD]
In conclusion, it should be seen that there exists at least as much reason to conclude that liberals are no more intelligent than moderates or conservatives. If anything, we should question the premises and much of the methodology behind many of these “studies” based on our experience with eugenicists a in the past and global warming frauds in the present. Both have been proven to have employed faulty or bad science to further political agendas. Furthermore, if we were honest with ourselves, we can go back through the information provided here and determine that the liberals have provided us with sufficient information to determine that the more “educated” a person is in our society today, the more likely they are to actually pose a threat to our society by way of “unnatural” morals and values that are outside what humans are designed to accept. In truth, this is all open to debate and interpretation. But the one conclusion that is evidenced beyond all doubt is that those who call themselves liberal are looking to find, create or manufacture some excuse to legitimize their claims of moral and intellectual superiority so as to further their political agendas. Once again, history tells us that, if we fall for this trap, if we allow these fallacious arguments to succeed, the inevitable result is never good for society. It always ends in tyranny and – all too often – in mass murder.