Conservatives need not apply? < "stupid people are generally conservative ">

Charleston.net ^ | Wednesday, February 11, 2004 | Editors

[Bigun]

"Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average."

Yep! In their cloistered world agreement = smarter!

[cyborg]

Another asswipe high on his own supply

[puroresu]

If stupid people are conservative, then why do "liberals" do the following:

A) Insist that literacy tests be abolished as a prerequisite for voting. (Wouldn't such tests keep conservatives from voting, and thus elect more "liberals"?)

B) Throw temper tantrums over the use of IQ tests for employment, college admissions, etc.. (Wouldn't such tests weed out the conservative riff-raff?)

C) Constantly promote egalitarianism. (Wouldn't that raise conservatives up at the expense of "liberals"?)

D) Insist that the very idea of IQ is a myth. (Wouldn't that threaten the superior position of the smarter "liberals"?)

E) Insist that intelligence, if it exists at all, is due to environment and not heredity. (Wouldn't that justify affirmative action for conservatives? If we're less intelligent, it must be because we were disadvantaged by a bad environment)

F) Dumb down the schools. (Wouldn't that make the kids more conservative?)

G) Fill the TV screen up with moronic crap like MTV, "reality" dating shows, and Jerry Springer. (Again, wouldn't that move the population to the right?)

H) Open the borders to the most uneducated and low IQ immigrants. (Wouldn't that flood California and other states with ultra-conservatives?)

I) Howl with outrage over special honors classes and other programs to encourage the brightest students to excel. (Wouldn't such programs give the most "liberal" students an early start on their future careers as left-wing activists and politicians?)

J) Prefer public schools to private ones or home schooling, even though the latter two produce the brightest and best educated kids. (Wouldn't smarter kids be to the advantage of "liberalism"?)



I could list other things, but you get the idea. Most "liberals" are nitwits who sit around telling each other how smart they are.

[LuigiBasco]

Would you please change your tag line?

For some reason I find myself going to see Anna each time I see it!

[NativeNewYorker]

You are dead-on right. Interesting how philosophy professors feel perfectly at ease flat-out lying.

[TaxRelief]

Actually there is a 129 to 139 window of liberalism in the IQ dept. It's the groups I call the "study hard" intelligent: they can handle the tougher physics/mathematics with hard work, and cruise through the liberal arts classes with little effort.

Once you get above 140 and start to cruise into the genius ranges, conservatism rears its head and logic prevails, unless there is emotional instability, greed or extreme narcissism involved.

How the IQ levels split below 129, I don't know. There is definitely another strong band of conservatism somewhere in the 95 to 129 range.

< /educated guessing.

[GulliverSwift]

This is just another case of projection. People are naturally inclined to believe in the moral and intellectual inferiority of those with whom they disagree. It's part and parcel of the term ideology. The fact that this chump is ignorant of this basic fact shows that he is not qualified in his field.

And no amount of "studies" will solve this dilemma since IQ tests are already subjective. Throw politics into the mix and you have something that is an empirical nightmare.

Also, the definition of conservative used by Mill is a far cry from the one used in this country. In fact, it is the conservatives of today who are closest to the positions embraced by Mill. Again, Brandon ought to know this. If he does, then it proves that he's an idiot for saying something so contradictory; if he doesn't know, then he's unqualified.

[DoctorMichael]

Alas, the principles of Conservatism, such as smaller government, are looked down upon by those who depend on the government for their daily bread.

[SAJ]

''...conservatives, that, stupid as they may be... ''

And, evidently were, given that they freely donated the fruits of their labours to such an institution.

Given their sundry policies and attitudes, I wouldn't give week-old urine to the university I attended.

[sauropod]

I tell them my reasoning (I WON'T get into it here)...

you big tease.

[TheBigB]

Well that just means the line is doing its job!

[Brilliant]

I have a better explanation: If you can't do, teach.

[sauropod]

Quite good.

[talleyman]

Thanks for his email address - I sent him my regards:

"First, being a professor of philosophy indicates that you are not capable of doing anything useful. Or as Jay Leno phrased it, ""Philosophy majors study questions like, 'Is the glass half empty or half full?' This helps prepare them for their jobs later in life, like being a waiter: 'Would you like that glass filled, Sir?' "

Second, your John Stuart Mill quote brings to mind another: "You must be an intellectual. Only an intellectual could say something so stupid." - George Orwell

Sincerely yours,

[my name]

P.S. Since Universities can afford to employ the likes of you, they obviously have no lack of funding."

[End Times Sentinel]

Deconstructivist Sublimations: Nihilism, dialectic postcultural theory and pretextual rationalism

It makes me feel important just to read that!  Good find!!!

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[malakhi]

why do "liberals" do the following

Because, at root, liberals really are elitist. They generally cover it up with populist rhetoric, but secretly think that people are too dumb to govern themselves, and thus need their "enlightened" self-anointed leadership. You don't often see one let his guard down like this, and really say what he thinks.

[TaxRelief]

Answer to your questions in order:

A) personal gain.

B) personal gain.

C) personal gain.

D) personal gain.

E) denial.

F) Power-mongering.

G) Power-mongering.

H) Conservatives do that too.

I) Power-mongering.

J) Power-mongering.

The intelligent liberals, IMHO, are so driven by emotion that they go through hoops in their denial of the failure of gov't institutions. Why else would Sylvan's parking lot always be full?

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP - EDUCATION - LIBERALIZATION OF AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES

[dangus]

He should also know that JOHN STUART MILLS advocated FREE MARKETS when he said that, as opposed to a ROYALIST, CONTROLLED ECONOMY! The term "conservative," has changed 180 degrees.

In other words, Mr. Chairman of the Polictical Science department either is
A. So Gut-wrenchingly STUPID and IGNORANT that he has never understood a thing Mills stood for, or
B. Is purposely miseducating students.

In either case, he must be fired immediately.

[TaxRelief]

Remember the old adage:

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.