Conservatism linked to "low effort" thinking

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Agema:

I have no idea who 'TC' is. I'm sure, however, HuffPo carried the article out of a deliberate, mischievous intent we were supposed to draw the requisite inferences from. That's the sort of reason I don't read HuffPo. It makes me quite angry, because as a scientist I believe in trying to minimise the mangling of science for political purposes. Using research in this way brings science and scientists into disrepute: in this area, the damage from this incident is now done.

Thank you for that. TC = topic creator.

Vegosiux:

May I ask you just who on the US left supports stuff like that? Because, if you can't come up with at least a few names, then I'm afraid I'll have to call shennanigans again.

Most importantly to your point, my concern is that leftism in the US will not work. When it doesn't and it bankrupts the country, people are going to be looking for scape goats (probably Jews... sigh... again). I do find the Terry Schiavo affair very frightening. We did go to a new low, killing a woman through neglect without any kind of written instruction by her to do so and that she was not brain dead, terminal, nor even need of extensive medical measures. She just needed food and water. The culture of death claimed a new kind of victim with that one.

DrVornoff:

I'm telling you what the consensus is. You want to change the consensus, you need some damn good proof. And so far, you haven't produced any. Just anecdotal evidence and the smug insistence that your definitions are the correct ones.

I very much doubt this "consensus" includes Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the editorial staff of National Review Magaine, The Herritage Foundation, Fox News... I could go on. In fact, I'm certain, at least with National Review, it does not as many of the ideas I've offered here are mirrored in those pages. Doubt me on that?

Gorfias:
I very much doubt this "consensus" includes Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the editorial staff of National Review Magaine, The Herritage Foundation, Fox News... I could go on. In fact, I'm certain, at least with National Review, it does not as many of the ideas I've offered here are mirrored in those pages. Doubt me on that?

Are you trying to troll me with responses like that? You're saying that your skewed interpretation is correct because you have in your camp a bunch of polemics and a couple of propaganda machines? I'm going to need more credible sources than that. The closest you've come is quoting Hayek once. But you haven't provided me with any real conservative sources, just asinine talking points and more us vs them rhetoric.

DrVornoff:

Gorfias:
I very much doubt this "consensus" includes Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the editorial staff of National Review Magaine, The Herritage Foundation, Fox News... I could go on. In fact, I'm certain, at least with National Review, it does not as many of the ideas I've offered here are mirrored in those pages. Doubt me on that?

Are you trying to troll me with responses like that? You're saying that your skewed interpretation is correct because you have in your camp a bunch of polemics and a couple of propaganda machines? I'm going to need more credible sources than that. The closest you've come is quoting Hayek once. But you haven't provided me with any real conservative sources, just asinine talking points and more us vs them rhetoric.

You appear to be writing that your sources count, mine do not. To dismiss out of hand National Review and the Heritage Foundation harms your credibility.

Gorfias:
people are going to be looking for scape goats (probably Jews... sigh... again)

Im curious as to why you are so obsessed with leftism leading to a ragime in which all are destroyed and exterminated under the fourth riech. Surely if leftism is so wrong you dont need to use such obvious strawmen to attack it. "IT WILL CAUSE THE HOLOCAUST!" is pretty far up there on the list of "views that are dangerous i can assign to things i dont like". Sure left has some flaws. But the idea it leads to gulags, death camps and murder fields is at best well... fucking rediculous. Please source ANY leftist who claimed to support this or any evidence you have that leftism will cause such events to happen. It really harms your arguement.

"If we elect the right then it will lead to the removal of everyones left eyeball in a religious ritual to appease jesus at birth. It will also lead to the sacrificial eating of the right foot of all women when they are married" see how i assigned something terrible to a position and offered no proof it was related in any way? Thats kinda what you just did... but you used more extreme consequences.

Volf:
*reads OP Title and article*
*sees that Huffington Post is the source*
*Moves on*

Honestly you might as well read a article on Fox News about how Liberals are all stupid and take the article serious.

You do realize that much of HuffPo's content is linked to other sites, right?

Gorfias:
Most importantly to your point, my concern is that leftism in the US will not work. When it doesn't and it bankrupts the country, people are going to be looking for scape goats (probably Jews... sigh... again).

Are you looking for a record in number of times gone Godwin in one thread? What the fuck's your problem? "Leftism," which I take from you to mean "liberalism," is going to lead to another Holocaust?

DrV's right. You are taking any negative trait you can think of, branding anyone to the left of YOU with it, and then demanding people take that seriously.

Also, your cute little anecdote about the golf-playing professor didn't make a lick of sense.

Gorfias:
You appear to be writing that your sources count, mine do not. To dismiss out of hand National Review and the Heritage Foundation harms your credibility.

I dismiss sources that I can't vet or that I have repeatedly caught lying. For you to tell me that Rush Limbaugh counts as a valid scholarly source or an authority on law and civics suggests that you and he visit the same drug dealer.

BiscuitTrouser:

Gorfias:
people are going to be looking for scape goats (probably Jews... sigh... again)

Im curious as to why you are so obsessed with leftism leading to a ragime in which all are destroyed and exterminated under the fourth riech.......Sure left has some flaws. But the idea it leads to gulags, death camps and murder fields is at best well... fucking rediculous.

http://jpfo.org/images02/9.jpg

http://rt.com/files/news/magadan-sorrow-at-world-s-end/gulag2.jpg

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/cambodia-killing-fields-08.jpg

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

DrVornoff:

Gorfias:
You appear to be writing that your sources count, mine do not. To dismiss out of hand National Review and the Heritage Foundation harms your credibility.

I dismiss sources that I can't vet or that I have repeatedly caught lying. For you to tell me that Rush Limbaugh counts as a valid scholarly source or an authority on law and civics suggests that you and he visit the same drug dealer.

For you to dismiss Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, not as scholarly sources but as a widly heard and influential political commentators is the height of ignorance and arrogance.

Tyler Perry:

Also, your cute little anecdote about the golf-playing professor didn't make a lick of sense.

Sorry you didn't like it. It was told to me by a college professor. The reason the prof didn't ever speak to the student again was, even with as close as they had to be together, the professor (likely left of center rather than right of center) took great umbidge with the student for breaking hierarchle order and calling him by his first name. I just meant to illustrate that this order is not just a right of center thing.

Gorfias:
For you to dismiss Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, not as scholarly sources but as a widly heard and influential political commentators is the height of ignorance and arrogance.

I'm dismissing them as known liars and frauds. They're not credible experts, they're propagandists pandering to a base. John Edward is a widely heard and influential individual as well, but scientists still aren't going to let him eat at their table because he's not a bloody scientist.

Sorry you didn't like it. It was told to me by a college professor. The reason the prof didn't ever speak to the student again was, even with as close as they had to be together, the professor (likely left of center rather than right of center) took great umbidge with the student for breaking hierarchle order and calling him by his first name. I just meant to illustrate that this order is not just a right of center thing.

So you take an anecdote, immediately assign a political orientation to it, and then justify this assumption with another assumption about the subject's own political orientation based only on their career.

I would have thought that through a little better.

Gorfias:

http://jpfo.org/images02/9.jpg

http://rt.com/files/news/magadan-sorrow-at-world-s-end/gulag2.jpg

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/cambodia-killing-fields-08.jpg

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

I dont know what this is meant to show me? Yes gulags and death camps have existed? So has ritualistic human sacrifice. Weve still shown equally as much evidence yhat the left will cause the above to happen as the right will cause ritualistic human sacrfice. None.

I think i'd like to climb a mountain and scream "NO FUCKING SHIT" at the top of my lungs until they exploded and the population of whatever nation i happened to be in went deaf, but that's not necessary. It was always apparent to me that conservative speakers were mentally lazy, a test confirming it hardly seemed necessary after Ronald Reagan who was so fucked in the head i'm still unclear as to how they spotted a difference in behavior that lead to his Alzheimer's diagnosis.

DrVornoff:

I'm dismissing them as known liars and frauds. They're not credible experts, they're propagandists pandering to a base. John Edward is a widely heard and influential individual as well, but scientists still aren't going to let him eat at their table because he's not a bloody scientist.

I think that's very elitist and close minded of you, but, there it is. And because the Heritage Foundation doesn't agree with you either, they don't count either I suppose.

I would have thought that (golf story) through a little better.

Agreed. My bad. I thought it a fun story that illustrated the hierarchle nature of liberal academia but funny stories aren't funny if you have to explain them.

BiscuitTrouser:

Gorfias:

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

I dont know what this is meant to show me? Yes gulags and death camps have existed? So has ritualistic human sacrifice. Weve still shown equally as much evidence yhat the left will cause the above to happen as the right will cause ritualistic human sacrfice. None.

Why did this happen? And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA? I'm just warning you that it isn't going to be pretty.

Gorfias:

And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA?

One, USA doesn't have a left. Two, are you calling the less right of your two blocks evil or incompetent?

Vegosiux:

Gorfias:

And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA?

One, USA doesn't have a left. Two, are you calling the less right of your two blocks evil or incompetent?

I think it fair to write that Obama and his followers fit a pretty standard academic left outlook.

I'm writing I see nothing coming from the Obama administration or Democratic party that appears to be about keeping the country from going bankrupt. At least Ronald Reagan raised the Social Security contribution 2.5% (and, I think, bumped the age of retirement up) to fit changes in reality (people living longer, lower worker to retiree ratio). No serious proposals coming from the left at this time. Obama has talked about raising taxes on the rich, but admits (as reported by Charles Krauthammer) that doing so is more about "fairness" than budget matters.

Gorfias:

Vegosiux:

Gorfias:

And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA?

One, USA doesn't have a left. Two, are you calling the less right of your two blocks evil or incompetent?

I think it fair to write that Obama and his followers fit a pretty standard academic left outlook.

"Followers" huh. Why yes, must have been just a mindless herd who blindly follow the leader, them pesky libruls.

And no, they don't look like "standard academic left" to me, they're still quite to the right to what I know as left. Actually, right to some of what I know as right, too.

I'm writing I see nothing coming from the Obama administration or Democratic party that appears to be about keeping the country from going bankrupt. At least Ronald Reagan raised the Social Security contribution 2.5% (and, I think, bumped the age of retirement up) to fit changes in reality (people living longer, lower worker to retiree ratio). No serious proposals coming from the left at this time. Obama has talked about raising taxes on the rich, but admits (as reported by Charles Krauthammer) that doing so is more about "fairness" than budget matters.

You either look to increase revenues or to spend less. And whatever Obama's administration can come up with, it needs to be more watertight than a mermaid's bra in order not to be bombarded from orbit by the other side.

Gorfias:

DrVornoff:

I'm dismissing them as known liars and frauds. They're not credible experts, they're propagandists pandering to a base. John Edward is a widely heard and influential individual as well, but scientists still aren't going to let him eat at their table because he's not a bloody scientist.

I think that's very elitist and close minded of you, but, there it is. And because the Heritage Foundation doesn't agree with you either, they don't count either I suppose.

I would have thought that (golf story) through a little better.

Agreed. My bad. I thought it a fun story that illustrated the hierarchle nature of liberal academia but funny stories aren't funny if you have to explain them.

BiscuitTrouser:

Gorfias:

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

I dont know what this is meant to show me? Yes gulags and death camps have existed? So has ritualistic human sacrifice. Weve still shown equally as much evidence yhat the left will cause the above to happen as the right will cause ritualistic human sacrfice. None.

Why did this happen? And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA? I'm just warning you that it isn't going to be pretty.

The holocaust was commited by a far right faschist group. Like really far right. Just saying. I imagine the economy will go into the bin and everyone will get mad. I dont imagine the first thing YOU do when youre mad is genocide. So i dont think it will be anyone elses.

Im warning you that presenting the idea the HOLOCAUST will be caused again by the economy going bust is a load of bullshit with no evidence and no logic behind it. EVEN if it did go bust why would this suddenly cause random murders of a people for no reason. The atrocities you cited were caused by insane faschists. None of which are in power right now since faschism is far right and apparently the left will do this.

Vegosiux:

You either look to increase revenues or to spend less. And whatever Obama's administration can come up with, it needs to be more watertight than a mermaid's bra in order not to be bombarded from orbit by the other side.

Personallly, I'd like to see a combo of this (tax more, spend less), including bumping the social security contribution up. Currently it is not applied to income over $110K. I'd like to see that covering up to $500K.

BiscuitTrouser:

The holocaust was commited by a far right faschist group. Like really far right. Just saying. I imagine the economy will go into the bin and everyone will get mad. I dont imagine the first thing YOU do when youre mad is genocide. So i dont think it will be anyone elses.

Im warning you that presenting the idea the HOLOCAUST will be caused again by the economy going bust is a load of bullshit with no evidence and no logic behind it. EVEN if it did go bust why would this suddenly cause random murders of a people for no reason. The atrocities you cited were caused by insane faschists. None of which are in power right now since faschism is far right and apparently the left will do this.

I thought it very original of me to think of the Nationalist Socialists as Left wing rather than right, but then found out a number of conservative think tanks and publishers have been writing that for years. Hard to be on the cutting edge of anything these days! As I wrote earlier, according to Hayek, there is no socialism. Only facism. This isn't to write that you cannot have right wing authoritarianism, I just think it has more to do with harsh treatment of citizens run afoul of government and less to do with the concentration and centralization of power.

EDIT: This guy is kind'a loon, but his logic for this article is pretty sound. He connects the dots between nice sounding government programs, like socialized health care, and the Holocaust. While I won't write this guy is in the political mainstream, this particular collumn is pretty mainstream conservative outlook. http://www.wnd.com/2009/10/111973/

Gorfias:

Vegosiux:

You either look to increase revenues or to spend less. And whatever Obama's administration can come up with, it needs to be more watertight than a mermaid's bra in order not to be bombarded from orbit by the other side.

Personallly, I'd like to see a combo of this (tax more, spend less), including bumping the social security contribution up. Currently it is not applied to income over $110K. I'd like to see that covering up to $500K.

BiscuitTrouser:

The holocaust was commited by a far right faschist group. Like really far right. Just saying. I imagine the economy will go into the bin and everyone will get mad. I dont imagine the first thing YOU do when youre mad is genocide. So i dont think it will be anyone elses.

Im warning you that presenting the idea the HOLOCAUST will be caused again by the economy going bust is a load of bullshit with no evidence and no logic behind it. EVEN if it did go bust why would this suddenly cause random murders of a people for no reason. The atrocities you cited were caused by insane faschists. None of which are in power right now since faschism is far right and apparently the left will do this.

I thought it very original of me to think of the Nationalist Socialists as Left wing rather than right, but then found out a number of conservative think tanks and publishers have been writing that for years. Hard to be on the cutting edge of anything these days! As I wrote earlier, according to Hayek, there is no socialism. Only facism. This isn't to write that you cannot have right wing authoritarianism, I just think it has more to do with harsh treatment of citizens run afoul of government and less to do with the concentration and centralization of power.

EDIT: This guy is kind'a loon, but his logic for this article is pretty sound. He connects the dots between nice sounding government programs, like socialized health care, and the Holocaust. While I won't write this guy is in the political mainstream, this particular collumn is pretty mainstream conservative outlook. http://www.wnd.com/2009/10/111973/

Well socialised healthcare in england most certainly hasnt caused a holocaust here despite being around for a long while. Any ideas why this is? Anyone who tried to connect healthcare and the holocaust is a loon end of story.

"Am I suggesting that socialized medicine of the kind being promoted in America today leads inevitably to holocaust and mass murder?

No.

But I am saying it is a necessary prerequisite for government-directed holocaust and mass murder to occur. "

Lets think of some genocides. Rwandas genocide was given the OK by the government and yet it wasnt based on healthcare. I think that invalidates that somewhat. Surely the ability for the government to run and own the ARMY is a greater threat to this eventuality than healthcare?

"But the army are people and wont commit genocides".

Im going in to be a doctor and i can tell you now I WONT commit genocides. What makes doctors more likely to do this than soldiers? Either will do for commiting a genocide apparently and i fail to see how a government doctor is neccessary for killing when we have government soldiers.

BiscuitTrouser:

Well socialised healthcare in england most certainly hasnt caused a holocaust here despite being around for a long while. Any ideas why this is? Anyone who tried to connect healthcare and the holocaust is a loon end of story.

The rubber hasn't hit the road yet. What happens if England goes Bankrupt? Though I think it will be worse if it is the USA that goes broke as we are too big to bail out. Even England might be bailed out.

We go bankrupt and the state owns the means of providing health care and they announce there isn't enough to go around, look for factions to be trying to exclude some group or another stating, "my group counts, the others (Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, homosexuals, the menally challenged) don't count... oh, and when we don't provide health care to them, they may cause trouble. Best we round them up and murder them ahead of time." It can happen.

If I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

Gorfias:

BiscuitTrouser:

Well socialised healthcare in england most certainly hasnt caused a holocaust here despite being around for a long while. Any ideas why this is? Anyone who tried to connect healthcare and the holocaust is a loon end of story.

The rubber hasn't hit the road yet. What happens if England goes Bankrupt? Though I think it will be worse if it is the USA that goes broke as we are too big to bail out. Even England might be bailed out.

We go bankrupt and the state owns the means of providing health care and they announce there isn't enough to go around, look for factions to be trying to exclude some group or another stating, "my group counts, the others (Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, homosexuals, the menally challenged) don't count... oh, and when we don't provide health care to them, they may cause trouble. Best we round them up and murder them ahead of time." It can happen.

If I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

Noted but not explained or evidenced so i ignored it and you havnt drawn any similiarities either. I think youre completly offbase. You dont need socialised healthcare to commit genocide. You need a military. If you dont want the government to have the power to commit a genocide youre WAY too late for america man. WAY to late. The armount of arms and soldiers you guys have is large and if a government wanted to it could use those soldiers to commit a genocide no matter what healthcare was in use.

Id put a large amount of money on the idea that bunkruptcy doesnt always end in a holocaust. Or that the ONLY way to save countries from the a holocaust after a bankruptcy is to get rid of socialised healthcare.

You also failed miserably to understand socialised health care which allows and encourages anyone with money to go private. Socialised healthcare provides healthcare for those with NONE right now, it doesnt replace healthcare for those that can easily afford it.

EDIT: Typo.

BiscuitTrouser:

1) You dont need socialised healthcare to commit genocide. You need a military. If you dont want the government to have the power to commit a genocide youre WAY too late for america man. WAY to late. The armount of arms and soldiers you guys have is large and if a government wanted to it could use those soldiers to commit a genocide no matter what healthcare was in use.

2) Id put a large amount of money on the idea that bunkruptcy doesnt always end in a holocaust. Or that the ONLY way to save countries from the a holocaust after a bankruptcy is to get rid of socialised healthcare.

1) Agreed, but with socialized health care, there is a train of logic that explains WHY the military would kill large swaths of its own citizens.

Again, if I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use limited resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

2) My Dad used to say that it is easy for everyone to love one another when we are all fat and happy. Some wise paraphrased words from "Men in Black" .. "A person is smart. People are stupid panicky animals and you know it." Tell them they're cut off from Government benefits to which they've become accustomed and things can get ugly. What's happening in Greece is kid stuff. They're freaking out, and they're having a relatively easy time of bankruptcy as they are small enough to bail out. The USA isn't going to be so lucky. At a minimum, expect hate crimes to go through the roof.

Gorfias:

BiscuitTrouser:

1) You dont need socialised healthcare to commit genocide. You need a military. If you dont want the government to have the power to commit a genocide youre WAY too late for america man. WAY to late. The armount of arms and soldiers you guys have is large and if a government wanted to it could use those soldiers to commit a genocide no matter what healthcare was in use.

2) Id put a large amount of money on the idea that bunkruptcy doesnt always end in a holocaust. Or that the ONLY way to save countries from the a holocaust after a bankruptcy is to get rid of socialised healthcare.

1) Agreed, but with socialized health care, there is a train of logic that explains WHY the military would kill large swaths of its own citizens.

Again, if I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use limited resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

2) My Dad used to say that it is easy for everyone to love one another when we are all fat and happy. Some wise paraphrased words from "Men in Black" .. "A person is smart. People are stupid panicky animals and you know it." Tell them they're cut off from Government benefits to which they've become accustomed and things can get ugly. What's happening in Greece is kid stuff. They're freaking out, and they're having a relatively easy time of bankruptcy as they are small enough to bail out. The USA isn't going to be so lucky. At a minimum, expect hate crimes to go through the roof.

Because Hitler was a madman and sunk a complete waste of resources into his vision of the perfect world because he was evil, not becausr it had any real benefit to society.

I imagine that the USA going bankrupt WILL increase crimes. Almost certainly. But it wouldnt cause an organised holocaust since that wouldnt solve anything and there isnt a governmental figure head with the power or the will to try and do such a thing. And even if their was i doubt the lack of a social health system would stop him.

Gorfias:
I think that's very elitist and close minded of you, but, there it is. And because the Heritage Foundation doesn't agree with you either, they don't count either I suppose.

It's not often I get called an elitist for saying that I don't trust the word of a known charlatan.

Agreed. My bad. I thought it a fun story that illustrated the hierarchle nature of liberal academia but funny stories aren't funny if you have to explain them.

It also doesn't prove much of a point.

I thought it very original of me to think of the Nationalist Socialists as Left wing rather than right,

You're kidding right? Well if declaring yourself something is enough to make you that thing regardless of your actions, then I declare myself King of the Werewolves. I expect you to address me as "Sir" from this point on.

As I wrote earlier, according to Hayek, there is no socialism. Only facism.

And he is in the minority on that opinion.

This isn't to write that you cannot have right wing authoritarianism, I just think it has more to do with harsh treatment of citizens run afoul of government and less to do with the concentration and centralization of power.

Not much to do with the centralization of power? That's one of the main tenets of authoritarian politics!

Gorfias:
We go bankrupt and the state owns the means of providing health care and they announce there isn't enough to go around, look for factions to be trying to exclude some group or another stating, "my group counts, the others (Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, homosexuals, the menally challenged) don't count... oh, and when we don't provide health care to them, they may cause trouble. Best we round them up and murder them ahead of time." It can happen.

Lots of words, none of them explaining how this is plausible.

If I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

Hitler's Final Solution that involved the execution of Jews, blacks, gays, gypsies, and the disabled was based on his own intense racism exacerbated by the weird theosophist cult he was involved with and the fact that he believed eugenics was the way to the future. In other words, the dude was insane and operating on logic that would later prove to be complete bullshit.

Ultratwinkie:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/07/conservative-politics-low-effort-thinking_n_1410448.html?ref=mostpopular

Conservatives and liberals don't seem to agree about much, and they might not agree about recent studies linking conservatism to low intelligence and "low-effort" thinking.

As The Huffington Post reported in February, a study published in the journal "Psychological Science" showed that children who score low on intelligence tests gravitate toward socially conservative political views in adulthood--perhaps because conservative ideologies stress "structure and order" that make it easier to understand a complicated world.

Here is the study: http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/03/16/0146167212439213.abstract?rss=1

"People endorse conservative ideology more when they have to give a first or fast response," the study's lead author, University of Arkansas psychologist Dr. Scott Eidelman, said in a written statement released by the university.

Does the finding suggest that conservatives are lazy thinkers?

"Not quite," Dr. Eidelman told The Huffington Post in an email. "Our research shows that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking."

For the study, a team of psychologists led by Dr. Eidelman asked people about their political viewpoints in a bar and in a laboratory setting.

Bar patrons were asked about social issues before blowing into a Breathalyzer. As it turned out, the political viewpoints of patrons with high blood alcohol levels were more likely to be conservative than were those of patrons whose blood alcohol levels were low.

But it wasn't just the alcohol talking, according to the statement. When the researchers conducted similar interviews in the lab, they found that people who were asked to evaluate political ideas quickly or while distracted were more likely to express conservative viewpoints.

"Keeping people from thinking too much...or just asking them to deliberate or consider information in a cursory manner can impact people's political attitudes, and in a way that consistently promotes political conservatism," Dr. Eidelman said in the email.

The study was published online in the journal "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin."

Honestly, this doesn't seem to come as a surprise. The conservative dogma in politics is palpable.

What do you think?

A liberal site says that conservatives are stupid?

What a shocker, this is almost as shocking as the time Fox News complained about something.

Edit: Didn't see the link to the study, still seems kinda fishy.

Gorfias:

BiscuitTrouser:

Well socialised healthcare in england most certainly hasnt caused a holocaust here despite being around for a long while. Any ideas why this is? Anyone who tried to connect healthcare and the holocaust is a loon end of story.

The rubber hasn't hit the road yet. What happens if England goes Bankrupt?

How about you tell me, since you're apparently an economics wizard.

How does a country go bankrupt, and what happens when it does?

Gorfias:

BiscuitTrouser:

Well socialised healthcare in england most certainly hasnt caused a holocaust here despite being around for a long while. Any ideas why this is? Anyone who tried to connect healthcare and the holocaust is a loon end of story.

The rubber hasn't hit the road yet. What happens if England goes Bankrupt? Though I think it will be worse if it is the USA that goes broke as we are too big to bail out. Even England might be bailed out.

We go bankrupt and the state owns the means of providing health care and they announce there isn't enough to go around, look for factions to be trying to exclude some group or another stating, "my group counts, the others (Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, homosexuals, the menally challenged) don't count... oh, and when we don't provide health care to them, they may cause trouble. Best we round them up and murder them ahead of time." It can happen.

If I'm completly off base, why is it, do you think, that the Nazis killed or neutered the mentally challenged? Why bother? Why use resources doing this? BTW: Much of their rationale was based upon positions echoed among the American left, as noted in the linked column.

At this point, it's rather important to note that the NHS was founded just after the end of the Second World War, at a time during which the United Kingdom was pretty much completely broke, what with it having to rebuild most of its major population centres and all. The road was already tearing apart the rubber at its founding, and yet it survived. The service has remained largely the same regardless of budget deficits and surpluses, without needing to resort to the scapegoating of ethnic groups.

Your objections, and the objections of nuts like Farah and Coulter (you really need to start listening to and using far more authoritative and knowledgeable sources), come across as laughably paranoid to anybody with any understanding of history and/or economics. Actually, "laughably" is the wrong word, because it's really quite sad. We're talking about the real fucking world and the lives of real fucking people, not hyper-right-wing delusional dystopian fantasies.

On a side note, your attempt to equate the American left with the Nazi Party is cute, but I'm afraid it isn't remotely convincing to anybody with a modicum of intellectual honesty.

BiscuitTrouser:
... Hitler was a madman and sunk a complete waste of resources into his vision of the perfect world because he was evil, not becausr it had any real benefit to society.

I think it was Simon Weisenthal that begged the world not to look at Nazism through a prism of Hitler's own personal insanity. It was a machine with a logic and cruel and murderous purpose of its own.

There is a murderous logic to the idea that you should have a socialist health care system, but that it is a waste to use resources on the "unworthy". The Nazi's, I think, followed that logic.

DrVornoff:

It's not often I get called an elitist for saying that I don't trust the word of a known charlatan.

Doing it. Limbaugh and Coulter are entertainers, but they also very, very very more often raise points the non-Fox media ignore to libertie's peril. Dismissing them out of hand is sheeple like thinking.

I thought it very original of me to think of the Nationalist Socialists as Left wing rather than right,

You're kidding right? Well if declaring yourself something is enough to make you that thing regardless of your actions, then I declare myself King of the Werewolves. I expect you to address me as "Sir" from this point on.

Odd you chose to clip my astonishment that I was NOT original in this.

As I wrote earlier, according to Hayek, there is no socialism. Only facism.

And he is in the minority on that opinion.

And the majority is always right? Baaaaah! Sheeple among us! Baah bah bah bah bah!

Hitler's Final Solution that involved the execution of Jews, blacks, gays, gypsies, and the disabled was based on his own intense racism exacerbated by the weird theosophist cult he was involved with and the fact that he believed eugenics was the way to the future.

Many of the American left support eugenics. Conservatives tried to rescue Terri Schiavo. It is the left that trumpets the positive social effects of abortion (or are abortion rights a conservative initiative?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Donohue

As written above, we should not diminish the evil of the Nazi movement by attributing its defects to the insanity of a single individual. Its problems were systemic.

Gorfias:

Many of the American left support eugenics. Conservatives tried to rescue Terri Schiavo. It is the left that trumpets the positive social effects of abortion (or are abortion rights a conservative initiative?).

Citation needed on the eugenics thing.

T.S., I refuse to even comment because the moment the case hit the media, the woman herself was the last thing anyone cared about; if they even cared about her at all.

Abortion rights are a liberal initiative indeed. And you're saying it as if they're a bad thing.

Gorfias:

BiscuitTrouser:
... Hitler was a madman and sunk a complete waste of resources into his vision of the perfect world because he was evil, not becausr it had any real benefit to society.

I think it was Simon Weisenthal that begged the world not to look at Nazism through a prism of Hitler's own personal insanity. It was a machine with a logic and cruel and murderous purpose of its own.

There is a murderous logic to the idea that you should have a socialist health care system, but that it is a waste to use resources on the "unworthy". The Nazi's, I think, followed that logic.

Theres also a murderous logic to insurance companies that these same people will cost them a lot of money and as such shouldnt be covered by their insurance. Go figure. Socialist healthcare treated steven hawking despite the fact he is "disabled". Id say that as long as people are watchfull and carefull we can make very sure socialised healthcare only serves as a tool for the public to use when they cant afford basic treatment.

Also cite the proof that the left supports eugenics or admit you invented that lie. Since im left and im physically disgusted by the idea.

Gorfias:
It is the left that trumpets the positive social effects of abortion (or are abortion rights a conservative initiative?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect

This = eugenics?

How does that work? If allowing mothers to choose to abort is eugenics, physical attraction is eugenics. Saying no to sex is eugenics.

Gorfias:
There is a murderous logic to the idea that you should have a socialist health care system, but that it is a waste to use resources on the "unworthy". The Nazi's, I think, followed that logic.

At this point, I'm afraid Godwin is going to rise from his grave on the next full moon and murder you.

Doing it. Limbaugh and Coulter are entertainers, but they also very, very very more often raise points the non-Fox media ignore to libertie's peril. Dismissing them out of hand is sheeple like thinking.

So you're saying that I should trust the words of people who lie constantly? They're not journalists. They're not experts. They're propagandists spinning you a nice little story in which it is you against the world so that they can more easily separate you from your money.

Odd you chose to clip my astonishment that I was NOT original in this.

Oh, I've heard that talking point before. I was just under the mistaken impression that no one was using it anymore.

And the majority is always right? Baaaaah! Sheeple among us! Baah bah bah bah bah!

Apparently you are also unfamiliar with how scientists and historians reach consensus.

Many of the American left support eugenics.

Many right-wingers supported it too. What's your point? That people back then were racist? I'm pretty sure I figured that out on my own.

Oh, wait, you're using present tense? Are you off your fucking rocker? Where on earth are you getting that from? What are you smoking? And can I have some?

Conservatives tried to rescue Terri Schiavo.

How the hell did we get to this? And you are aware that there was nothing to save, right? The coroner's report came in saying that her brain had been slowly turning to liquid for years. There was no way in hell she was ever going to recover. But of course, you knew that, right?

I'm not even going to read the abortion shit you posted because I'm in too good of a mood to get into another abortion debate right now and besides that it has fuck all with what I've been talking about. And if you're just going to use abortion as proof that I support eugenics, then I'm just going to get drunk and laugh in your face because that's the only sane response to such an accusation.

I think we've really jumped the shark in this thread. I'm going to do some research and find some links about Margaret Sangers desire to cull out black people and the lefts' response to protection for doctor's not reporting down syndrome, etc. and start a new thread.

Golly, I may need to start another thread to point out that, yes, allowing a country to go bankrupt is a bad thing.

Gorfias:
http://jpfo.org/images02/9.jpg

http://rt.com/files/news/magadan-sorrow-at-world-s-end/gulag2.jpg

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/cambodia-killing-fields-08.jpg

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

Do you seriously believe there's NO DIFFERENCE in the policies of Dennis Kucinich and Pol Pot?

Gorfias:

For you to dismiss Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, not as scholarly sources but as a widly heard and influential political commentators is the height of ignorance and arrogance.

Dood, both of them have been caught saying "non-factual statements" ALL THE DAMN TIME. They inevitably fall back on "whoops! JUST AN ENTERTAINER!" as their "defense".

If they don't WANT to be taken seriously, then they don't get taken seriously. It was their call.

Gorfias:
I think that's very elitist and close minded of you, but, there it is. And because the Heritage Foundation doesn't agree with you either, they don't count either I suppose.

Yeah, I suppose it IS 'closed minded' of us to ignore many-times-admitted liars who claim to be public clowns.

And what could possibly be more elitist than preferring facts over bullshit?

By the way, God told me Reagan wants you to send me all your money so I can Create Jobs with it.

Gorfias:

Why did this happen? And what do you think is going to happen if the Left bankrupts the USA? I'm just warning you that it isn't going to be pretty.

Okay, first of all, the GOP was well on their way to bankrupting this country before Obama got elected. Remember a dude named Bush?

Secondly, explain the 'logic' that runs from 'government debt' to 'Auschwitz'.

Vegosiux:
One, USA doesn't have a left. Two, are you calling the less right of your two blocks evil or incompetent?

...and there's that, too. :D

Gorfias:

I'm writing I see nothing coming from the Obama administration or Democratic party that appears to be about keeping the country from going bankrupt. At least Ronald Reagan raised the Social Security contribution 2.5% (and, I think, bumped the age of retirement up) to fit changes in reality (people living longer, lower worker to retiree ratio).

Careful there, dood. The Church of the GOP has excommunicated people before for blaspheming against the Icon of Blessed Ronnie by mentioning these inconvenient facts....

http://jpfo.org/images02/9.jpg
No serious proposals coming from the left at this time. Obama has talked about raising taxes on the rich, but admits (as reported by Charles Krauthammer) that doing so is more about "fairness" than budget matters.[/quote]

Wait, wait. You're saying that because this is 'about fairness', it WON'T bring in any money? Or that it's worthless because it's not screwing over old poor people, as the Great Communicator did?

Vegosiux:

You either look to increase revenues or to spend less. And whatever Obama's administration can come up with, it needs to be more watertight than a mermaid's bra in order not to be bombarded from orbit by the other side.

I don't think being well-thought-out and having the facts marshalled would help any plan the Dems came up with at all. Right now, the GOP would oppose a plan from Obama to destroy an incoming Death Meteor if he proposed it first, just because they NEED him to lose the election THAT MUCH.

hardlymotivated:

On a side note, your attempt to equate the American left with the Nazi Party is cute, but I'm afraid it isn't remotely convincing to anybody with a modicum of intellectual honesty.

Ayup.

Gorfias:

Many of the American left support eugenics.

Bullshit.

Or rather, you're deliberately conflating multiple meanings of 'eugenics'. Go out there, and find me some Libruls who want to breed a 'master race'. I'll wait.

Not wanting to FORCE mothers to exhaust and/or bankrupt themselves with untreatable special-needs children? Sure, I'll cop to that, but that's a LOOOOOONG way from Hitler.

(Fun fact- Hitler OUTLAWED abortion for "Aryan" women. Had to keep them pumping out the next generation of the Master Race, after all...)

Gorfias:
Conservatives tried to rescue Terri Schiavo.

Yeah, your side's efforts to preserve the the poor woman's corpse are well-remembered.

Gorfias:
I think we've really jumped the shark in this thread.

Well, YOU certainly did.

Gorfias:
I'm going to do some research and find some links about Margaret Sangers desire to cull out black people and the lefts' response to protection for doctor's not reporting down syndrome, etc. and start a new thread.

I was unaware that Margaret Sanger was still head of Planned Parenthood. What's next, dragging out the Dixiecrats as "proof" that "ZOMFG DEMOCRATS R TEH REAL RACISTS!!@!" ?

Gorfias:
Golly, I may need to start another thread to point out that, yes, allowing a country to go bankrupt is a bad thing.

And yet, you will cheerfully vote in the people who will make it happen, as long as they promise to cut taxes.

Gorfias:
I think we've really jumped the shark in this thread. I'm going to do some research and find some links about Margaret Sangers desire to cull out black people and the lefts' response to protection for doctor's not reporting down syndrome, etc. and start a new thread.

I was just thinking to myself that we haven't had a conspiracy theory thread in a while.

Golly, I may need to start another thread to point out that, yes, allowing a country to go bankrupt is a bad thing.

Can you point to who in this thread was looking forward to national bankruptcy?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked