Are Liberals REALLY More Intelligent Than Conservatives?

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
You can find intelligent and not so intelligent people that follow all different kinds of political ideology. Stupid people don't generally write and theorize the ideologies, that takes some level of intelligence.

I've yet to see in my time on this earth that either main political ideology is more or less smarter than the other. There are idiots that come from all walks of life and ideologies. They are the ones that blindly follow anything that some demagogue tells them.
edit on 4-2-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 




Like that?
edit on 4-2-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
You can find intelligent and not so intelligent people that follow all different kinds of political ideology. Stupid people don't generally write and theorize the ideologies, that takes some level of intelligence.

I've yet to see in my time on this earth that either main political ideology is more or less smarter than the other. There are idiots that come from all walks of life and ideologies. They are the ones that blindly follow anything that some demagogue tells them.
edit on 4-2-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)


I would have to add perhaps the really 'intelligent' (and devious) ones (at least by one way of measurement) are the ones at the very top of the financial heap, that fund and control elements in both mainsteam parties, and play them against each other to achieve their desired outcomes.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by GAOTU789
 




Like that?


This is where the indoctrination comes in. In my OP I showed how, from a very early age, kids are programed to rely on the government for their every need. It’s fracking disgusting!

This is why I question the intelligence of liberals! People actually believe this garbage. What;s more shocking is when you show them the federal checkbook and explain how these promises are completely unsustainable they call you names and tell you how you want to roll old people off a cliff and say you don’t care about the poor!

If I didn’t know it to be a reality I’d consider the concept of liberalism to be completely unbelievable because its so outrageous!



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Most CONservatives proudly display that they still believe in fairy tales involving TALKING SNAKES...


...and believe in imaginary friends claiming that "god" talks to them.


Many still feel bitter that women and minorities are now allowed to vote.

Many think that everyone in the world who isnt like them should be blown up.

Many of them do not care for the environment, workers rights, fair wages and health coverage.

And, of course... EDUCATION doesn't rank too high on their list of priorities. Go figure!


Whats that tell ya about them?


Thats just the tip of the iceberg. They havent evolved much since the stone-age.
edit on 4-2-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



lol, and that's your arg? If you got higher education you got ripped off.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 

Dear Tecumte,

You ask a valuable and probing question. I'm really glad you asked.

Consider Christianity. Just the word brings up powerful emotions. On ATS it seems like you'll get fury as much as anything else, but no matter. Ask someone what a Christian should be. You'll probably get answers like kind, forgiving, non-judgmental, loving, church going, you know the kind of stuff.

When one looks at an individual Christian, one may see someone who is pretty nice, good at forgiving, too judgmental, and maybe skips church a lot. Or perhaps it will be some other combination of failures and successes.

You see, there are two different descriptions for Christians, what they are, and what they should be. I see the same thing for Democrats and Republicans.

Both parties have standards which are filled with good, but differing, principles. Just as there are wide gaps between Christinity and Judaism, there are wide gaps between Republican and Democrats (as political theories). The problem many have is that they don't separate the party principles from the party members.

Even though the Democrat party is more comfortable with big government, some individual Republicans can also be for big government. ( Remember the Christian that skips church?) There can even be small government Democrats.

For me, the questions are: Are their principles clearly different? Yes. Does adoption of those principles affect my life? Yes. Can I ever completely trust one of those misbegotten, Janus -faced, fundamentally dishonest, power seeking, snail slime licking, sycophants? Well, let me think.

But, as I said, the parties' principles are different. Looking only at those principles I would prefer to live under the Republican party. I don't know if my income would go up, but i suspect I'd be freer. (Yes, I know I should be considering the Greens, the Libertarians, the Socialists, etc. but I can only keep up with so much.)

My life on a personal level? That's tough. One, we don't know what would have happened had a particular failed law or regulation passed instead of being tossed aside. Oh, there are some obvious ones, like Solyndra and Fast and Furious, that we know had bad effects without corresponding good ones.

Thanks again for the question. Let me know if I didn't answer it, and I'll try again (only at not such great length)

With respect,
Charles1952

OK. Wait a minute! Got one. I have a friend (no, it's not me) who is a very large woman, amply endowed. For obvious reasons she HATES wearing a seat belt. Federal highway people issued a regulation saying that any state that didn't require seat belts would lose federal money. Our state caved. (our legislature was solidly Democrat)

Oooh, Ooooh, I 've got another one. As much as she hates seatbelts, I hate the little swirly, pig tail lightbulbs. Hate everything about one. I had one burn out and took it the fire department for proper disposal. (See, I'm not a monster.) The fireman said they didn't accept them, that I would have to drive it to the County seat, 40 miles away, they MIGHT know where to take it.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Ya that would be a pretty good example. I really doubt she had any idea what Obama even really ran on besides "Hope" and "Change".
Wonder how that's working out for her?



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I am curious. knowing how intelligent sociopaths are. Are there more lefty sociopaths or conservative sociopaths?

And looking at politicians doesn't count. That is a balanced field with both squads playing for the same outcome.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yes you may be right, but the same thing could be said for the whole 'war on terror' charade as well, where many on the so called right also run to the Big Nanny state for 'protection' against all sorts of shadowy imaginary enemies alledgedly hinding under ever rock and behind every shrub. Both parties want to control you and extract a price, BOTH mainstream parties conjur up never ending boogiemen that only 'they' can 'protect you from'. That's why I find more and more people like myself supporting neither and looking for candidates like Dr. Paul, that really is a Libertarian at heart. I guess if I had to choose in multiple choice I would have to say Libertarians IMO may well indeed be the most *intelligent* of the three. But I back no party, only a very few candidates and do not particularly look to goverment to solve or even help with ANY problems I might have. It has become so corrupt and sold out on Both sides of the aisle, it would be like going to the mafia for help. No thanks.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


I hear you! (star for that)

I won’t attempt to justify some of the things the republican party has done. For the record, Bush was not/is not/will never be a conservative. He is more of a neocon or RINO (or liberal who strayed slightly right). Regardless, he is not a conservative. The only people who would classify him as such are people who are farther left!


Almost ALL OF US are disenfranchised right now. The two party-system has failed because there is little difference, which explains the rise of the alternative Paul and why people like me classify themselves as “conservatives” rather than republicans!

Thanks for the input!


edit on 4-2-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
No, not at all.

Conservatives are more intelligent than Liberals and BOTH are WAY, WAY, WAY MORE INTELLIGENT than Republicans or Demovrats.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Nice solid thread that hasn't brought to bear an insidious and notoriously predictable squabble when discussing left/right, liberal/conservative ideological differences. That alone deserves a well earned "star & flag".

I have to first address the response that Conservatives wish to change the "status quo". That statement falls upon itself in the very nature of what "conservatism" is; that is to conserve -- if we look at the truest meaning of the word. Of course it is all a game of sophistry when it comes to the labeling the electorate of the People.

The true intelligence of any group is measured by their ability to not allow themselves to be bound by the collective mindset that they each must march to the beat of the established drum. I believe this is where the vast majority of the electorate resides and is the part of society that needs to start flexing their inherent political power.

Here is what I find most interesting in your rebuttal to another thread. You have at the very least attempted to open up a dialogue and discussion on not only your ideas, but the ideas presented within the other thread, a thread based on an article that supports and reinforced the other author's own prejudices (ironic, I know) towards conservatives.

From the linked original article that spawned this thread the biased reporting is most evident in their final paragraph:


In smaller words (for all your racists out there), here’s how Dr. Brian Nosek from the University of Virginia explains it to the Huffington Post:

"Reality is complicated and messy . . . Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies."

Of course, the study’s authors note that “all socially conservative people are not prejudiced, and all prejudiced persons are not conservative." We’d like to see their research in full before we go ahead and agree on that one though.


But we are to believe that conservatives are the "dumb" ones while reading the above.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by freethinker123
 



I would like to share some love and as stated I said that it was an interesting post. You showed yourself capable of analysis and intelligence but then descended into lazy, blanket statements about liberals.


Well…just because I may have demonstrated the intelligence and the capability of analyzing the situation doesn’t mean I don’t subscribe to one side or the other!


I’m a conservative (bordering on libertarian – or as Ventura says, “libertarian-lite”).


I hope that your reference to 'so called' independents is not a further attempt to polarise and manipulate people into supporting the corrupt 2 party system in the US.


I define independents as those people who refuse to subscribe to one side or the other. These people claim to somehow be ABOVE it all, which amounts to a copout in my book.



MORE blanket statements about groups of people? Never mind, you carry on stereotyping and I'll judge people according to their individual merits.

But you are giving me a great insight as to why US politics is in the dire state it is today so thats something. I take it by your disdain for independents that you are a fan of the US two party political system that is so unpopular today?



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Yes, it's tough trying to accurately nail down ideas using these labels such as Christian, conservative, liberal, libertarian, Dem, Rep, because obviously they mean so many different things to so many different people.

And too, they are often used especially by the kept press to try and divide people rather than to seek common ground.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by freethinker123
reply to post by sonnny1
 


I don't dispute his right to an opinion. What I do take issue with is any attempt to divide or making name calling generalisations about one 'group' above another. Fine if there is a concrete case being made to prove that liberals are 'brainwashed, intellectually dishonest' etc, make it but this isn't in the rant section, its a discussion about intelligence and political support.

The polarisation because of Obama... have you just woken up or something? US politics has been polarised for years. To be honest you sound a bit like a victim of one of the supposed two ideologies the politicians expect US citizens to support.


I give ALL Presidents a chance to show their worth. I am an Independent,so actually my voting record is quite mixed.

When a man promises to change the status-quo,as Obama did,and falls heavily short,dividing America,with perpetual rhetoric,and faulty policy,that's beyond party lines. That effects the whole of America,regardless of party lines.

The worst President,that I have ever witnessed was Jimmy Carter. Obama's polarization,has given him an edge. Not because hes Democratic. Because he is intelligent,and has squandered his time in the White House,playing the Two-Party "Liberal" agenda.....



Quite right too. Sometimes in US politics one gets the feeling that the cheerleaders of the two main parties would rather the incumbent fail if he is not from their party, even if it hurts the country.
I agree with you that Obama has been a big disappointment. However, I can see you have some historical perspective of the US system, do you not agree that US politics has become markedly more polarised in recent years and that the current administation is continuation of this trend? Bush for example deeply polarised the US (except for a tragic period that most if not all US Presidents would have successfully united the country). Clinton showed ability to deal make, but Gingrich and House Republicans hunted him as that administration talked darkly of a conspiracy.

It seems to me that those that blame Obama (or Bush) for polarisation are looking at symptoms, and not the cause of the problem. The cause is the US political system - which is failing more badly than it ever has before.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by freethinker123
 



MORE blanket statements about groups of people? Never mind, you carry on stereotyping and I'll judge people according to their individual merits.


So when I “group” people that’s BAD and when you “judge” people that’s GOOD?


We’re doing the same thing, bud!
I put people into categories based on “individual merit” which is exactly what you claim to do. I categorized myself too…there is nothing wrong with it…it’s human nature to do this.


But you are giving me a great insight as to why US politics is in the dire state it is today so thats something.


Of course I have…glad to be of assistance!



I take it by your disdain for independents that you are a fan of the US two party political system that is so unpopular today?


I don’t like the 2 party system…I said that in a previous post in this thread actually. All republicans are NOT conservatives, as I outlined in the first paragraph of the OP. There should be 4-6 parties IMO.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
The last time I took an IQ test it was 140. I am a conservative. My high intellect reasons that both socialism and liberal ideals are doomed to failure. I give you the present example of both sitting in the White House today.

Let us reason together..

1. When was the last time a nation taxed itself into prosperity ?

2. When was the last time a nation facing many national security threats on multiple fronts thought cutting and gutting it's military was the best option ?

3. How can one get out of debt by borrowing more money than one takes in ?


These are but a few examples of the socialist liberal mindset. Now I ask you, who is the more intelligent group in the room by far ?



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
There are idiots everywhere....and it's not confined to any political affiliation, color, religion, or citizenship.

Besides.....an idiot to one is a genius to another....just as a terrorist to one is a freedom fighter to another.
edit on 4-2-2012 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


So neither liberal nor conservative, on average, is smarter than the other?

PC?


The people who conducted the survey posted earlier had a different conclusion (as did I), which prompted my thread.


Thanks for the input!!



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by freethinker123
 



MORE blanket statements about groups of people? Never mind, you carry on stereotyping and I'll judge people according to their individual merits.


So when I “group” people that’s BAD and when you “judge” people that’s GOOD?


We’re doing the same thing, bud!
I put people into categories based on “individual merit” which is exactly what you claim to do. I categorized myself too…there is nothing wrong with it…it’s human nature to do this.


But you are giving me a great insight as to why US politics is in the dire state it is today so thats something.


Of course I have…glad to be of assistance!



I take it by your disdain for independents that you are a fan of the US two party political system that is so unpopular today?


I don’t like the 2 party system…I said that in a previous post in this thread actually. All republicans are NOT conservatives, as I outlined in the first paragraph of the OP. There should be 4-6 parties IMO.


I'm surprised you didn't delete the part where I said I judge people 'according to individual merits'. Pretty poor effort at quoting out of context where its there for all to see


And don't confuse your personality traits with human nature - as if you don't have control over them. You choose to make sweeping generalisations about people you disagree with, simply because they don't share your opinion. That is not a fair way to go about things.

I agree with you that there should be more parties represented in both Houses, although if they are just variations of liberal and conservative mainstream thinking it might not change much.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join