Ideology and Time Preference

Among intellectual trends, things like group IQ, the genetic component to IQ, and allied topics are one of those areas that is grossly out of fashion right now. Progressives, building upon centuries of blank slatist error, are enforcing the creed of perfect interchangeability among various people groups, a dogma that is necessary to buttress their argument that disparate outcomes between different groups are solely due to “White racism” and “systematic bias.” Yet, the fact that different people-groups possess different traits and characteristics, including differences in group averaged intelligence, is one that many people intuitively grasp. The continued popularity (as I can see from the backend views and other statistics) of two articles relating to this subject that I wrote nearly six years ago demonstrates this. The official suppression of this area of inquiry is a shame because it has great explanatory power for all kinds of issues ranging from crime rates to socioeconomic performance and beyond. Really, if you don’t understand or accept group differences in IQ, then you won’t ever really be able to grasp many things we see from the social sciences.

Once such thing that I’d like to talk about today is ideological breakdown amongst our population and how this impacts why broad ideological groups in our society act the way they do. But to reference this difference, I want to focus on an important second-order effect of intelligence, this being time preference. For those who may not be familiar with the concept, time preference describes an individual’s willingness (or lack thereof) to forgo immediate pleasure or profit in lieu of pursuing goals or activities which provide greater reward later on. High time preference is when a person wants it now, low time preference is the opposite.

Low time preference is the farmer planting his seeds and then waiting all season for them to bear fruit. High time preference is the gatherer eating up everything in the area and then wondering where his next meal will come from. Developing low time preference among populations that were able was an invaluable step towards developing high civilisation.

Now, there seems to be a fairly strong relationship between IQ and time preference, with greater intelligence generally correlating with lower time preference. Granted, I don’t personally know of any “peer reviewed studies” that have tried to precisely quantitate this relationship. Understand that though I’m basically making a qualitative argument at this point, common experience that we all probably share intuitively suggests this relationship. A long history of informal empirical observation, that we all “see” to be true in our daily experience, suggests that the regression between intelligence and time preference is fairly strong. Obviously this doesn’t mean that every low IQ person is going to blow all their money on lottery tickets and basketball shoes, nor that no high IQ person will do so. There are a host of other factors in play ranging from religious belief to social pressures and beyond. But it does reflect general, and pretty generalisable, statistic trends that normally hold true.

So anywise, back to the matter of IQ and ideology in the USA. Based upon mine and other observations, the ideological breakdown versus IQ seems to follow two separate patterns for the Right and Left. The Right seems to exhibit a broader range of IQ, probably reflecting that rightist ideology is a more “natural” and “normal” way of looking at the world that “regular people” of all stripes will exhibit. At the same time, the dissident Right in its various factions seems to be weighted towards very high IQ types (say, >130), reflecting their heavy leaning towards philosophical and STEM type fields. The Left, in turn, seems to have a fairly small cognoscenti that clusters in the midwit range (~105-115) and which provides managerial leadership to a much larger sub-100 horde, many of whom are PoCs belonging to ethnicities with lower average IQs as groups.

So how does this apply to our current political situation? Well, I’ve frequently made the observation that the American Left, especially, seems to be particularly high time preference as compared to the European Left. They’re trying to do in four decades what it took the Euro Left greater than 140 years to accomplish. Every action the American Left takes is grossly reactive and carries with it this panicked psychological overtone of “We have to do something RIGHT NOW!! There’s NO TIME to think about what we’re doing!! Thinking is RACIST!!” To exhibit this mindset, check out Democrat lawyer Ron Filipkowski’s tweet in which he decries Lauren Boebert for wanting to read the text of bills presented to Congress before voting on them.

While I’m not a fan of the Euro Left, they do seem to have historically had a more measured approach to pushing their agenda.

I suspect the difference is found in IQ disparity. Until recently at least, Europe did not have much in the way of a large, ethnically distinct low IQ underclass. Meanwhile, the US has had a relatively large one which continues to grow via unrestricted immigration. As such, the Euro Left was in a position to follow a moderated approach that “acclimated” their populations to encroaching socialism. Their leadership could keep the long game in view. The American Left, on the other hand, is compelled by the low IQ proclivities of its constituent populations to keep throwing gas on the fire regardless of what it burns down.

So while the goals of the American and European progressive movements may be very similar, their methodologies have been quite different. American leftists follow an approach to implementing their ideological agenda that is obviously designed to appeal to low IQ people who don’t have much foresight or capacity for second- or third-order “metathinking.”

There’s a reason so much of the progressive Left’s economic program nowadays centres upon simple handouts, reparations, and other direct wealth transfer programs. It’s because that’s the only benefit the Left’s constituencies understand. Certainly, rightist ideas about teaching them to better themselves, obtain marketable skills, save their money - these are going to be right out. Likewise, self-defence and self-policing are hallmarks of low time preference people who take responsibility for themselves and their families. Gun control, on the other hand, is a stereotypically low IQ/high time preference policy choice because it essentially transfers responsibility away from self and onto an inanimate object. Let’s just punish a mass of people who are law abiding instead of compelling those who aren’t to act rightly. This can be seen from the simple-minded “direct correlation” arguments that gun controllers use to appeal to people unable to really consider higher order effects.

Support for abortion as it is presented in the USA is perhaps the epitome of high time preference, low conscientiousness/self-responsibility thinking. There’s nothing more low IQ than being unable to keep your legs together and then murdering the product of that union because you want to girlboss for another few years. Even our supposedly “scientific” response to Covid (and now monkeypox) exhibits the sort of ill-considered, high time preference “do something now regardless of whether it works or even makes sense” mentality that characterises the American Left’s ideological proclivities.

Even in the one area where you’d think the Left would be successfully utilising low time preference - the debate over climate change - they are consistently failing. I mean, what could be more long-term and forward thinking than saving the planet and bequeathing it to the generations to come? Gives off a real “planting a tree in whose shade I’ll never sit” kind of vibe to it. Yet, every solution to the “problem” involves some kind of get-rich-quick scheme for infrastructure providers, sold to people using short-term “the oceans will boil off in ten years” fearmongering. Long term solutions such as investing in proven high-energy density technologies like nuclear power are naysayed in favour of gimmicky nonsense like wind turbines. All of it is bolstered by the low-IQ failure to understand that weather does not equal climate, that just because it got to 115°F in Arizona a couple of days in a row doesn’t mean there’s any validity to selectively cherry-picked multidecadal climate models generated on a computer.

So yes, there really is a palpable difference in the IQ profiles of the two basic White ethneis in this country and their respective clients (which is what is really being modeled using ideology as a proxy). The bulk of the Left is, in fact, generally lower in IQ and exhibits correspondingly higher time preference behaviours and attitudes, which the political progressive Left must adapt to if they are to energise them. Unfortunately, while left-wing managerial leadership may not be overwhelmingly smart, they are crafty (which isn’t the same thing) and quite capable of capturing and using institutions to their own ends, thus enabling them to channel the destructive tendencies of their coalition into politically useful ends.

However, I’d close by suggesting that even though the Right may have a more normally distributed IQ profile (pun intended), conservatives and others on the broad Right also need to work on regulating their time preference, though ours needs to be more in the areas of following through on self-improvement. Lifting, not eating garbage food, reading good books, learning a trade, learning fighting skills, learning to shoot and handle firearms (and their accruements), generally just self-improving to prepare for the coming collapse - these are all things that people on the Right shouldn’t just talk about doing, but be doing. But this requires the cultivating of a low time preference approach to life that is not currently encouraged by our social media/megatainment/soundbite driven lifestyle. The Right’s broad profile has the horsepower to do this but needs to find the will to do so.

Not impressed.

I suggest reading Human Diversity by Charles Murray.

I have met a great many very intelligent people on the left. The biggest problem is: they accept as axiomatic many things which are not true.

It does not matter how smart you are, if you start with false assumptions.

Studies show weak and inconsistent relationships between intelligence and political leaning.

Political leaning probably has more to do with personality type and educational track than intelligence.

Equally intelligent graduates of Oberlin and Liberty are likely to have differing political leanings.

“It does not matter how smart you are, if you start with false assumptions.”

And the false assumption that is at the bottom of our racial dystopia is that “all races are the same”.

That that is a false assumption should be an absolutely no brainer and as self evident as the nose in your face - even to “smart” leftists, so why do they insist on knowingly accepting that assumption knowing that it is false.

There’s got to be something else at play. Something separate from IQ and logic that causes an intelligent leftist to knowingly promote that false assumption.

Best I can come up with is that they must have some genetic predisposition for “equality” or now “equity”. In other words the sight of inequality in the world, that someone or some group does better than another, causes leftists, regardless of intelligence, incredible discomfort and a strong sense of “unfairness”. And though they see the reality of inequality, because it causes them pain and a sense of guilt they want to do everything in their power to change that reality in order to alleviate their pain.

Best I can come up with is that they must have some genetic predisposition for “equality” or now “equity”.

There are some studies which indicate a genetic proclivity for Leftism.

It seems some people have a genetic proclivity for being unhappy, to blame the universe for existing.

The Left, consistently, is shown to be more unhappy than conservatives.

And the false assumption that is at the bottom of our racial dystopia is that “all races are the same”.

So what is race?

classification systems are very artificial, but we use them to try to understand the world.

When I studied nematodes, one of the methods of classification was to squash their rear ends on a slide and look at the patterns. I often thought this had much merit to classify humans. Sit everyone on a copy machine and look at the patterns.

We have let the media define the classification and bit into it hook, line and sinker.

Personally, I don’t care what color of skin or what does or does not hang between legs.

I try to test people on what they think and do. We have to get back to that. I am a bigot discriminating highly on behavior.

Behaviors can be modified to an extent, but they do reveal the hearts.

“Time preference”!

What a vague and useless term to get your point across.!

That term might be fine for the tiny fraction of “pointy head” intellectuals, but it means absolutely nothing to the vast masses.

A much better term is “instant vs delayed gratificatiin”. Or “short term vs long term happiness”.

Or maybe, even better, “responsible vs irresponsible behavior and choices”.

classification systems are very artificial, but we use them to try to understand the world.

It is not so artificial as we might think.

Charles Murray covers this extensively in Human Diversity.

Using clusters of ancestral genomes, there are several fairly distinct groups of humans on the planet. Those groups have significant differences in behaviors which can be measured.

Murray is far more subtle and careful than the short shrift I give him here.

In essence, humans are fairly easily sorted in several large genetic groups, by means of their ancestral continental homes. Those groups show consistent statistical differences in preferences and proclivities.

“I try to test people on what they think and do. We have to get back to that.”

Get back to what? What you’re alluding to has never existed nor will it ever in a multiracial society with significant differences in AVERAGE abilities between the races. The idea that you can treat people as individuals without regard to the group they belong to or identify with, maybe an ideal, but it will never happen.

Group identity, especially race, is very strong. Members of any group are very aware of how their group fares in society as a whole, and if it is seen as occupying the lower rungs of society, as is the case for blacks, they will invariably raise hell and scream “unfair”.

You see, your group’s interest is also your personal interest. Promoting your group interest is a way of promoting your personal interest at a societal level. It’s very similar to a political party.

It is my conviction that two groups of people with significantly differences in AVERAGE abilities, especially IQ, and whose members can be easily identified as belong to one or the other group, can never peacefully coexist together.

All you have to do to convince yourself of this is do this simple exercise...

Given the significant differences in AVERAGE IQ between blacks and whites, and treating every individual the way you want to - strictly on individual merits, which group would end up with the more menial and lower paying jobs? Which group of students would do worse at school?

And seeing this how do you think members of the poorly performing group will react? Especially when told that all groups are the same.

Is this not what we’re living?

Yes,

we are letting the media define the points of division. Liberals love division/classification as it is a way to control people.

Multiracial society has never existed? Again, look to history. it has existed, don’t let the media lie to you.

History is more than what we have lived.

The point is for you and I, as individuals, to discriminate on important things, and not let the media or government control us.

Skin color is a poor classification system. Group identity as you pointed out is very strong. Change the group identity. Trump doing that, making the identity MAGA and the liberals hate him for it.

“Skin color is a poor classification system.”

It isn’t just skin color, it’s all the visual characteristic of a person.

Some Indians (from India) are as black as any African, yet people don’t put the two in the same group.

“Multiracial society has never existed?”

They may have but they were not very harmoniously. Diversity is mostly discord.

“we are letting the media define the points of division. Liberals love division/classification as it is a way to control people.”

No, it’s reality that determine the divisions. Those differences are real. Pit bulls are quite different than poodles, and it’s not a good idea to put them in the same cage.

Of course there are opportunists, on both sides I might add, who will exploit the divisions for their benefit, but that doesn’t change the reality of the differences and their repercussions.

Now, there seems to be a fairly strong relationship between IQ and time preference, with greater intelligence generally correlating with lower time preference.... though I’m basically making a qualitative argument at this point

Actually, he is rediscovering "delayed gratification," a time-worn understanding of competence in life skills.

I'm so weary of the re-naming phenomenon.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.