A Caution Concerning the Kooky Conservative Conjecture
There is definitely a meme in the progressive blogosphere that conservatives and liberals think differently. People try to be polite, but I don’t think I’m the only person who perceives it to be really about the hypothesis that conservatives are not capable of rational thought.
One way of putting this is that “The Republican Brain” may have joined “What’s the Matter with Kansas” and “The Emerging Democratic Majority” and everything Richard Perlstein ever wrote on the list of books (which I haven’t read) which every progressive much read.
Also a favorite topic of mine is public it’s not a matter of opinion polling. Occasionally pollsters ask about verifiable facts (famously what fraction of the US Federal budget goes to foreign aid) and find the most remarkable beliefs.
There is some evidence that Conservatives’ beliefs are further from reality than liberals’ beliefs.
(non irony alert)
I think the evidence which I discuss below is not convincing, because the studies may be skewed, because the facts have a liberal bias.
In the USA the winter of 2012 was extraordinarily warm. Chris Mooney himself links to a study which notes that Liberals are more likely than conservatives to recall it that way.
Bill Gardner described a study (pdf warning) by Wendy Gross, Tobias Stark, Jon Krosnick, Jash Pasek, Gaurav Soods, Trevor Tompson, Jenifer Agiesta and Dennis Junius which shows the more people know about the Affordable care act, the more likely they are to favor it.
Fox News viewers didn’t know the facts about the US invasion of Iraq.
OK but I wasn’t joking about the liberal bias of the facts. The researchers who study the phenomenon have to choose a set of facts before testing knowledge of the facts. In the case of the warm 2012 Winter, the fact clearly fit the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis. A crafty conservative social scientist, could argue that liberals don’t accept the facts by asking if 1998 or 2012 were hotter (1998 is the base year for all conservacalculations of global warming, since it was extraordinarily hot).
Also in the case of the ACA the correct answers to the questions of fact were facts which tended to suppor the case for the ACA (at least the ones I looked at were).
The data which I have seen do not reject the hypothesis that
1) people’s beliefs of fact are influenced by their general ideology
2) this is equally true of liberals and conservatives
3) The whole body of evidence gives balanced support for liberalism and conservatism
and
4) the particular facts selected for the studies support liberal conclusions and so liberals are more likely to believe them.
I am very confident that part 3 of this hypothesis is false. But the recent research to which I linked, doesn’t test, let alone reject, the joint hypothesis 1-4.
Rational thought would not be preserving a parasitic organization that’s trying to recreate the wheel while damaging a wheel that works.
Kudos. Respect. (Once again.)
Every now and then you just have to say “Fuck Off!’
“Self-deprecating, too liberal for their own good, today’s progressives stand back and watch, hands over their mouths, as the social vivisectionists of the right slice up a living society to see if its component parts can survive in isolation. Tied up in knots of reticence and self-doubt, they will not shout stop. Doing so requires an act of interruption, of presumption, for which they no longer possess a vocabulary.
Perhaps it is in the same spirit of liberal constipation that, with the exception of Charlie Brooker, we have been too polite to mention the Canadian study published last month in the journal Psychological Science, which revealed that people with conservative beliefs are likely to be of low intelligence. Paradoxically it was the Daily Mail that brought it to the attention of British readers last week. It feels crude, illiberal to point out that the other side is, on average, more stupid than our own. But this, the study suggests, is not unfounded generalisation but empirical fact.
It is by no means the first such paper. There is plenty of research showing that low general intelligence in childhood predicts greater prejudice towards people of different ethnicity or sexuality in adulthood. Open-mindedness, flexibility, trust in other people: all these require certain cognitive abilities. Understanding and accepting others – particularly “different” others – requires an enhanced capacity for abstract thinking.
But, drawing on a sample size of several thousand, correcting for both education and socioeconomic status, the new study looks embarrassingly robust. Importantly, it shows that prejudice tends not to arise directly from low intelligence but from the conservative ideologies to which people of low intelligence are drawn. Conservative ideology is the “critical pathway” from low intelligence to racism. Those with low cognitive abilities are attracted to “rightwing ideologies that promote coherence and order” and “emphasise the maintenance of the status quo”. Even for someone not yet renowned for liberal reticence, this feels hard to write.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spreads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH
From the Guardian piece:
“But when I survey this wreckage I wonder who the real idiots are. Confronted with mass discontent, the once-progressive major parties, as Thomas Frank laments in his latest book Pity the Billionaire, triangulate and accommodate, hesitate and prevaricate, muzzled by what he calls “terminal niceness”. They fail to produce a coherent analysis of what has gone wrong and why, or to make an uncluttered case for social justice, redistribution and regulation. The conceptual stupidities of conservatism are matched by the strategic stupidities of liberalism.”
Going back as far as Will Rogers’ famous quote that he was ‘not a member of any organized political party; he is a Democrat”, the Left has for decades has been known to be the “big tent” party, the party of inclusiveness, bending over backward to make sure every voice is heard in discussions (hence nothing gets done many times, as anyone who has ever sat through a party meeting can attest.)
One of Obama’s law professors said when he (Obama) headed the Law Review, he would deliberately put people on the board whom he knew to be diametrically opposed to all he wanted to do, ‘just to get their opinions heard’.
It seems to me that the Left has two problems. One is that we have allowed this tendency to become a distraction, rather than an advantage. And two, the obscene amounts of money needed to run a campaign now (and all campaigns are now 365 days a year, every year games), has allowed/forced the Left into the arms of people they would have been arguing and running against in years past, hence the triangulation and trying to tap dance with every guy in the room.
George Lakoff reiterates his framing/messaging theories, the “strict father vs. nuturant parent” worldview, etc. in this Salon.com piece http://www.salon.com/2014/11/22/this_is_why_conservatives_win_george_lakoff_explains_the_importance_of_framing_and_what_democrats_need_to_learn/?source=newsletter
It seems that just as the Left has allowed practitioners of its own worst, or most exaggerated tendencies to take over, the Right has allowed the most closed minded and extreme among them to do the same.
EMichael, we do have to credit the Canadian Liberals with having a pair. They did not cave to bankers that bigger was better.
1) Rather than testing knowledge of facts, it might be better to test for a willingness to examine or seek out facts, and acknowledge them, once found.
2) Another aspect of the divide might have to do with the relative wealth of blue versus red states. It seems crazy to watch the poorest red state voters supporting Republicans, when their policies work so solidly against that constituency. But the fact of being poor itself interferes with dispassionate decision making, in many ways — shortage of time, heightened background anxiety, poor nutrition, poor education, and so on. None of these things are inherent to the people, but to their situation. However, once embedded in a poverty situation, its elements will act to prevent those people climbing out of it. Dispassionate thought in a situation of high anxiety, mistrust, and diffuse anger is highly counterintuitive and can easily be perceived as a route to increased weakness in a threatening world. Outsiders trying to promote it will be perceived as cold, clueless, or unrealistic.
Noni
“Fox News viewers didn’t know the facts about the US invasion of Iraq.”
As they say, a feature not a bug. Fear works wonders in politics. Been working for the Red Party all my life. The only fear that works for the Blue Party is Social Security. Maybe after a couple of years ADA will join SS.
Always remember that the AVERAGE IQ is 100. That being said there is no excuse for the intellectuals on the right to think and argue the way they do except to exert control over the greatest number of human beings through the political process. I happened to catch Gulliani on Meet the Press Sunday. I could not believe the racism he spewed. he could not have said the things he did 20 years ago and I suspect NBC would have shut him down when he started. But here is the thing. I do not doubt that his “facts” were true and I am not convinced that he himself believed the argument he was making, but it was the best argument to be made in support of the police state and the GOP’s exploitation of the white outrage that a black man has been in the White House for 6 years and recently announced that up to 5 million brown people would not be deported for the next 2 years barring Congressional action. So I think it is a horrible mistake not to call out the conservative intellectuals for what they are or at least explain that the ideology is designed to keep the boot of the 1% firmly planted on the throats of the other 99%.
As noted by Waldmann, conservatives come in several shades of grey. We should understand the differences as they are important to understanding the manipulative manner by which ignorance is exploited by one group against the others. There is the conservative base (actually reactionary right wing might be the better term to use). Those include the religious extremists, the racists and the just plain stupid. There is the right wing hierarchy that includes the Republican political class. Then there is the right wing elite, those who control the economic aspects of society and use their control for the purpose of enhancing their own wealth and positions of power.
The second group, the members of the hierarchy, includes those who appear to be as ignorant and foul mouthed as many of the base. They are the flotsam and jetsam of the right wing and are often politically active in their localities. In effect they’ve floated to the top of their peer group, the base, and have been rewarded with seats in the Congress. The names Gohmert and Bachmann come to mind. The worst examples suffer foot in mouth disease on a regular basis, but that makes them more apparent to the rest of society. Their intellectual betters like Ted Cruz and Darrell Issa are far more dangerous because they can actually sound as though they make sense and often impress the media with their flagrantly biased and misleading assessments of an issue. They use their better communication skills to advance their own positions and power by influencing their less analytic cohorts and the media. Then the worst of the lot are the elites who are likely to be very intelligent and shrewd, but who use those self skills only to advance their own wealth and power. They seem, to me, more odious only because they generally have so much wealth that adding yet more at the expense of all others seems redundant.
And here is an example of the kind of crap that the Right shovels out to the faithful. In “Before the Storm” Perlstein documents some of the truly crazy and extreme things that were coming out of the Conservative movement. Before that Hofstadter and Bell wrote reams about the paranoia.
I’ve been doing a bit of research on the subject and subscribed to one of the “saner” conservative websites. I’ve been inundated by stuff like the sample below. The words paranoid and intemperate really don’t begin to explain this stuff.
How can anyone consider Rand Paul as a serious candidate for anything when he puts his name on stuff like this:
Dear Fellow Patriot,
I refuse to accept that our nation’s colleges will always remain bastions of left-wing extremism.
I refuse to allow leftists to brainwash an entire generation of American students into hating our country and our free-market system.
That’s why I’m joining forces with the Leadership Institute, the nation’s premier conservative grassroots training organization, to help liberate our nation’s colleges and universities from the clutches of the left.
Please, as a personal favor to me, sign the national Save our Students petition. And then ask everyone you know to do the same.
My goal over the next several weeks is to find 100,000 conservatives who are sick and tired of the left’s hijack of our institutions of higher learning.
I want to wave this petition in the faces of the leftist lunatics who have seized control of our nation’s great universities.
Too many conservatives believe that America’s colleges are lost causes. They believe that tenure of liberal professors and the left’s tight control of university bureaucracies have turned higher education into a permanent breeding ground for left-wing extremism.
It doesn’t have to be that way.
In fact, I’ve spent a lot of time traveling the country to talk to young Americans who embrace our shared constitutional principles.
One thing is very, very clear to me. America’s college students agree with the conservative movement’s pro-freedom message.
All that’s missing is someone to help them stand up to the left-wing education establishment.
Conservatives shouldn’t surrender to the left. You and I shouldn’t leave this next generation of leaders to be brainwashed by America-hating socialists and Marxists.
Conservatives must fight back.
And that is exactly what the Leadership Institute and I will do.
Please sign the national Save Our Students petition today. Your signature will mean so much to conservative students in the fight against the left. They’ll know they have grassroots patriots like you standing with them.
I have told my friend, Leadership Institute president Morton Blackwell, that I will do what I can to get 100,000 patriotic Americans to sign this petition.
You and I will show campus liberals we’re coming for them – and we’re not afraid to fight them on their own turf.
Every day conservative young people must battle with a university culture hostile towards everything they ever learned about freedom and America’s traditions.
These students want to hold fast to pro-liberty, conservative principles.
Students have seen how the Obama administration’s big government policies have damaged their career prospects, their financial outlook, and even their family lives – their futures.
However, the constant left-wing propaganda students must endure in class day after day takes its toll, and many end up believing the left’s lies.
That’s why you and I have to fight back now.
If you agree with me, please sign the petition today.
In order to win, conservative students must have the organization, training, and support to fight back against the leftist campus monopoly and stop the indoctrination.
And the Leadership Institute will provide just that, with your help.
The Leadership Institute teaches students how to:
increase the size and effectiveness of their campus group
organize large numbers of volunteers and voters
host successful high-profile speaker events
engage in campus activism to promote conservative principles
use the media to get their message out
In short, they teach conservative students how to go toe-to-toe with campus liberals – and win.
Consider the case of Evan Schrage at Michigan State University (MSU).
Evan was a member of a student group the Leadership Institute started at MSU called the Campus Conservatives.
Evan enrolled in a creative writing course. When the professor went on a vicious anti-conservative tirade, Evan knew what to do, thanks to Leadership Institute training.
Evan recorded his professor’s rant on his cell phone video camera. He then sent it to Morton’s staff, who published it on the Leadership Institute’s campus news watchdog website, CampusReform.org.
The story became national news. Evan appeared twice on national TV to expose his professor.
The result?
The professor was suspended from teaching.
Will you stand with Morton Blackwell and the Leadership Institute to continue this vital work?
Please sign your petition right now.
Today’s college students are concerned citizens who are experiencing firsthand how big government destroys opportunity.
They’ve seen their graduating peers struggle to find jobs. They have friends who suffer under Obamacare and struggle to pay off student loan debt.
You and I can’t give them up to the left.
My friends at the Leadership Institute are across the country, visiting college campuses from UCSD in California to Bates College in Maine.
They’ve gone right into the “belly of the beast” to organize conservative students together into strong groups to fight back.
If you stand with Morton and me, we’ll show the radical professors and leftist administrators that Americans won’t let our nation’s youth become indoctrinated.
Please sign your petition now. And ask every friend and family member you know to do the same.
Thank you for your help to advance our shared conservative principles.
Sincerely,
Rand Paul
United States Senator
Mark:
I see this type of crap in Michigan and it is fun to go up against the pols as most of the time their positions are based on supposition. Present fact and they fade away.
It’s been a belief of mine for some time that the huge amount of people subscribing to conservative ideas in this country is more the result of “laziness” than lack of intelligence. And in fact, it’s an attempt to “do the right” thing in the face of intolerable conditions; that since they feel they are moralists, pain in the pursuit of the goal (prosperity, peace) is morally better than attempting to ameliorate the pain. And perhaps the whole thing is, like Thanksgiving, a leftover from our Puritan/Pilgrim past. But in any case, there are a lot of very intelligent people out there in the conservative public, and they are taking the “easy” way out; Libertarianism is a very attractive creed to this sort of person, with its pseudo-intellectual basis and its belief that people’s problems are their own to deal with (and the government being the expressed will of those who want to solve OTHER people’s problems, therefore bad). Just my thoughts, but the more conservatives I talk to, the more this seems to make sense to me.
“Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens”.
Many people cannot differentiate a belief (accepting a myth as fact) from a fact. Beliefs require faith in the myth that transforms it to truth.
Belief in myths are easy which Kennedy said allow the lazy:
“Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
Or to paraphrase Mark Twain: what gets you in trouble are the things they know “that just ain’t so”.
“In individuals insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs it is the rule” –Nietzsche