"Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says study." - Daily Mail.

[bnm]

From the Daily Mail:

-Children with low intelligence grow up to be prejudiced
-Right-wing views make the less intelligent feel 'safe'
-Analysis of more than 15,000 people


Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, says a controversial new study.

Conservative politics work almost as a 'gateway' into prejudice against others, say the Canadian academics.

The paper analysed large UK studies which compared childhood intelligence with political views in adulthood across more than 15,000 people.

The authors claim that people with low intelligence gravitate towards right-wing views because they make them feel safe.

Crucially, people's educational level is not what determines whether they are racist or not - it's innate intelligence, according to the academics.

Social status also appears to play no part.

The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people.

'Cognitive abilities are critical in forming impressions of other people and in being open minded,' say the researchers.

'Individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate towards more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.

'It provides a sense of order.'

The study, by academics at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, used information from two UK studies from 1958 and 1970 , where several thousand children were assessed for intelligence at age 10 and 11, and then asked political questions aged 33.

The 1958 National Child Development involved 4,267 men and 4,537 women born in 1958.

The British Cohort Study involved 3,412 men and 3,658 women born in 1970.

It's the first time the data from these studies has been used in this way.

In adulthood, the children were asked whether they agreed with statements such as, 'I wouldn't mind working with people from other races,' and 'I wouldn't mind if a family of a different race moved next door.'

They were also asked whether they agreed with statements about typically right-wing and socially conservative politics such as, 'Give law breakers stiffer sentences,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.'

The researchers also compared their results against a 1986 American study which included tests of cognitive ability and questions assessing prejudice against homosexuals.

The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics.

The authors also claim that conservative politics is part of a complex relationship that leads people to become prejudices.

'Conservative ideology represents a critical pathway through which childhood intelligence predicts racism in adulthood,' says the paper.

'In psychological terms, the relation between intelligence and prejudice may stem from the propensity of individuals with lower cognitive ability to endorse more right wing conservative ideologies because such ideologies offer a psychological sense of stability and order.'

'Clearly, however, all socially conservative people are not prejudiced, and all prejudiced persons are not conservative.'

Of course, I was made aware of this article by the smug, sneering, woolly-minded, BBC loving, tree-hugging, left wing liberal press.

 

[ainsworth74]

Swear I saw an article a couple of months ago that said something similar but just swapped the words left and right wing

 

[Clip]

In adulthood, the children were asked whether they agreed with statements such as, 'I wouldn't mind working with people from other races,' and 'I wouldn't mind if a family of a different race moved next door.'

I wouldnt mind either of those

They were also asked whether they agreed with statements about typically right-wing and socially conservative politics such as, 'Give law breakers stiffer sentences,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.'

And I agree with both of those. Where does that leave me then?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Actually I disagree with the last one to an extent, the parents should be teaching kids to obey authority, if kids are in school before they are taught it, it is too late imo.

 

[Ferret]

I wouldnt mind either of those



And I agree with both of those. Where does that leave me then?

As a reasonable person, grouped in with the majority of our population?

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Isn't the Daily Mail one of the most right wing newspapers out there? You have to admire the guts of the man who chose to run the story, given the audience most likely to read it.

 

[Old Timer]

Isn't the Daily Mail one of the most right wing newspapers out there? You have to admire the guts of the man who chose to run the story, given the audience most likely to read it.

I am afraid you are maybe 15 years out of date there.

The Daily Mail under Dacre has long supported Labour, and fell in behind Blair when he was elected in 1997, although Dacre favoured Brown and supported him right to the end.

Even today the Daily Mail does not support the Coalition, so I would hardly call it Right Wing.

I think little else needs to be said.

 

[Ferret]

I am afraid you are maybe 15 years out of date there.

The Daily Mail under Dacre has long supported Labour, and fell in behind Blair when he was elected in 1997, although Dacre favoured Brown and supported him right to the end.

Even today the Daily Mail does not support the Coalition, so I would hardly call it Right Wing.

I think little else needs to be said.

I found a copy of the Mail yesterday and had a quick read, and it repeatedly stuck the boot into Cameron. I think their problem with our PM is that he isn't right-wing enough.....

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Aye, as far as I can tell The Daily Mail is still right wing. The constant pops at single mothers, immigrants and Muslims speak volumes. Maybe they are drifting towards the centre, the website certainly seems to be taking a less right wing view. Apparently the Daily Mail website is one of THE success stories of old media adapting successfully into new media. Maybe articles like this are clear indicators of the new audience the Internet is bringing to The Mail?

 

[Oswyntail]

I am afraid you are maybe 15 years out of date there.

The Daily Mail under Dacre has long supported Labour, and fell in behind Blair when he was elected in 1997, although Dacre favoured Brown and supported him right to the end.

Even today the Daily Mail does not support the Coalition, so I would hardly call it Right Wing.

I think little else needs to be said.

Of course, the "New Labour" government was one of the more right-wing governments Britain has had in a long time.
And there does not seem to be a single paper that does support the coalition. It confuses them , because their output is based on rigid boxes, in which people cannot work together. Sadly, the grass-roots party members also seem to think like this - unlike the vast majority of sensible people in the country, who can see the good and bad in everyone. Which is why the article in the OP is bosh.

 

[Ferret]

Aye, as far as I can tell The Daily Mail is still right wing. The constant pops at single mothers, immigrants and Muslims speak volumes. Maybe they are drifting towards the centre, the website certainly seems to be taking a less right wing view. Apparently the Daily Mail website is one of THE success stories of old media adapting successfully into new media. Maybe articles like this are clear indicators of the new audience the Internet is bringing to The Mail?

Is it right wing to complain about immigrants though? I hear plenty of left wing people criticising the volume of immigration too.....

 

[Old Timer]

In the 2005 General Election, 22% of Dail Mail readers voted Labour, 14% Lib Dem and 7% for non-Conservative candidates.

With 43% of the readership voting other than Conservative then I think a few people on here need to reconsider their views.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is it right wing to complain about immigrants though? I hear plenty of left wing people criticising the volume of immigration too.....

Immigration is something that is a big issue amongst those who typically vote for left of centre parties. You only have to go into any working class district pub and sooner or later the subject comes up. For anyone to suggest it is a topic soley fanned by the Right Wing press for their own ends is completely crass.

The Left has long held the corner in regards to labelling any discussion at all on immigration as racist, although even people like Trevor Phillips have now come round to hold the view that many of the integration problems we now have are the result of this tainting and suppression of debate.

 

[Barn]

Is it right wing to complain about immigrants though? I hear plenty of left wing people criticising the volume of immigration too.....

This is the problem with a one dimensional political spectrum. One can be economically right wing but socially liberal, and one can be economically left wing and socially conservative.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Agreed. Closing down immigration is a right wing view, but if you hold it then it doesn't necessarily mean you have to hold right wing views about everything. People are more complicated than that.
I just found it surprising that the original article came from a source with the history of The Daily Mail.

 

[Old Timer]

Of course, the "New Labour" government was one of the more right-wing governments Britain has had in a long time..

The Conservatives and those who hold such broad views are opposed to the centralisation of control by the Government, and believe that the provision of any services by the Government are inefficient and wasteful.

The Labour Governments of 1997 to 2008 believed totally in the centralisation of power and a command and control economy, and thus in no way can they be considered Right Wing other than by those who supported them and now wish to distance themselves from the incredible damage Labour has done.

True Right Wing economics would see all services by Governmnet handed over to the Private Sector, albeit some would remain under a form of strategic oversight, so please do not try to suggest that the PFI arangements set up by Labour were Right Wing agenda as they were patently anything but. They were solely set up to enable Brown to go on a state spending spree, and a means of cynically fooling the voters that they were living in prosperous times.

As far back as the early 2000s those on the Right were warning of the economic timebomb that was being created, but were shouted down by those on the Left, of course now we know who was right and we all have to pay the consequences. Even key member os the Opposition have now come round to seeing this.

The sad thing is that although I detest Balls and everything he stands for and repsresents, he is actually right on two key issues, whereas the prsent Coalition Government is taking us down a path towards ultimate ruin, with ridiculous "Green Taxes" that no one else pays, and other leftist agendas which simply seek to increase the costs to Industry without any upside for the ordinary working person.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The sad thing is that although I detest Balls and everything he stands for and represents, he is actually right on two key issues, whereas the present Coalition Government is taking us down a path towards ultimate ruin, with ridiculous "Green Taxes" that no one else pays, and other leftist agendas which simply seek to increase the costs to Industry without any upside for the ordinary working person.

The perseverance with "Green Taxes" has an interesting effect of seeing a dramatic rise in the charges for water, gas and electricity to consumers, plus a very great increase in the profit margins of the utility companies. How very strange..:roll:

 

[Ferret]

Green taxes are a nonsense. Wake me up when China, India and the Yanks start taking notice. Until then, don't bother.

 

[Old Timer]

The perseverance with "Green Taxes" has an interesting effect of seeing a dramatic rise in the charges for water, gas and electricity to consumers, plus a very great increase in the profit margins of the utility companies. How very strange..:roll:

The Coalition is that very worst of all worlds scenario. It is neither Left, nor Centre nor Right.

We therefore are being driven by a mixture of different Policies the sum of which is to cause great damage to the economy of the Country.

The rise in VAT to 20% has simply resulted in the stagnation of consumer spending, which needs to be viewed against a background of ever increasing prices driven by the unblinding goal of carbon reduction.

The UK is alone in the World not only for setting such ridiculously high carbon reduction standards, but also for continuing to blindly follow them when it is so obviously damaging the competitiveness of our Industry and unecessarily raising the costs of everyday goods and services to consumers.

The Coalition is being led effectively by a small band of smug devotees who are determined to impose their LibDem ideals upon everyone, regardless of the price. Whilst they may hold the moral high ground ultimately it will be a pyrhic victory to look down on a Country which has destroyed its industry and competitiveness on the altar of LibDem idealogoy, an idealoogy which the Country clearly voted against. Had they wanted this the LibDems would have won far more seats.

What we need right now is an agenda where we reduce VAT and taxation to stimulate consumer spending, whilst at the same time as investing in Infrastructure projects which would be to the benefit of the Country overall and would stimulate employment. In this I am in agreement with Ed Balls, however much I detest him as a person and as a Politician.

By the end of the current term, the cost of public services will be some 5% higher than in 2008 and we will still be in the position of having to borrow £bns simply to pay the interest for Brown's borrowing spree. That fact alone needs to be considered when people whinge on about public sector cuts. Quite simply they are NOT cuts, and certainly not the amount that is needed.

The UK cannot continue to afford the costs of the public services it wants, without higher taxation, but that will damage demand by reducing disposable income. It is time also that the UK stopped being the destination for every Tom, Dick, and Harry who are seeking a better life here. We simply cannot continue to allow more and more unproductive people into the UK. We can already see the problems this has caused by the pressure on our public services, utilities and housing in the South of the Country.

There are some very fundamental problems that need to be addressed, the Coalition is not capable of doing this either intellectually or Politically, driven as it is by competing and mutually exclusive Political idealogies.

 

[David]

OT, while I'm broadly in agreement with your post, there is 1 point on which I do disagree with.

The VAT rise from 17.5% to 20% I think was a very smart rise. Yes it has pushed some prices up, but for families struggling on a lean budget (IE. Only buying food and other essentials such as clothes), it has not impacted them at all. A general tax rise such as Income tax or National Insurance would have hurt them more as they would have less to spend overall. The VAT rise has only impacted on "big ticket" goods such as electrical items and cars (to name 2 things).

The 1 thing I didn't like about the VAT rise though was a Labour minister (I think this was Ed Balls, but I'm not certain) claiming that the average person would be £7.50 a week worse off because of it. Now, that doesn't sound much does it? But let's look at it another way.

For someone to be £7.50 a week worse off because of the VAT rise would have been spending £300 a week already on items on which VAT is charged! At the time, I was working, and my average take home pay was £240 (give or take a pound or so). I considered myself an average person, in that I took my money, and bought what I wanted, and saved what was left over for the following week, or if I wanted something, put the money aside for it until I had enough. For me to have been £7.50 a week worse off, I would have been spending well beyond my means, and getting myself into a huge financial mess, just like the Labour government did ....

 

[Ferret]

Balls actually has a point with calls for a tax cut to stimulate growth. He also has a point where the Euro is concerned - yes the ECB should act as lender of last resort. I used to dismiss him as a bit of a crackpot when he talked of spending even more money we didn't have, but if he's grasped the concept of a percentage tax cut possibly increasing the overall tax receipt to the Treasury then he's onto something. Question is - if he's grasped this, what about George Osborne and Danny Alexander?!

 

[Zoe]

The Labour Governments of 1997 to 2008 believed totally in the centralisation of power and a command and control economy, and thus in no way can they be considered Right Wing other than by those who supported them and now wish to distance themselves from the incredible damage Labour has done.

Labour did however abandon quite a few of their socialist principles under Blair in favour of the free market. For example no attempt was made to reverse Tory policy like bus deregulation. As for PFI, it was first introduced under John Major and had Labour been genuine socialists they would have not continued it. Even Ken Livingstone tried to stop the London Underground PPP but Brown forced it through.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Labour did however abandon quite a few of their socialist principles under Blair in favour of the free market. For example no attempt was made to reverse Tory policy like bus deregulation. As for PFI, it was first introduced under John Major and had Labour been genuine socialists they would have not continued it. Even Ken Livingstone tried to stop the London Underground PPP but Brown forced it through.

Zoe, what was the manifesto position of the Socialist Labour Party when the Labour Party in its guise of "New Labour" was in power?

 

[bnm]

so please do not try to suggest that the PFI arangements set up by Labour were Right Wing agenda as they were patently anything but.

Weren't a Labour idea though were they?

As far back as the early 2000s those on the Right were warning of the economic timebomb that was being created, but were shouted down by those on the Left,

And the exact opposite was happening in the period 1992-1997.

 

[NSEFAN]

And the exact opposite was happening in the period 1992-1997.

And that's the problem, isn't it? I wonder how much of politics is "left vs right", rather than "self-serving group A vs self-serving group B". It's hard to tell who is who sometimes.

I suspect there has been neither a real conservative nor real liberal government for quite some time.

 

[Zoe]

Zoe, what was the manifesto position of the Socialist Labour Party when the Labour Party in its guise of "New Labour" was in power?

Archive of the 2005 manifesto is here: http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge05/man/soclabman.htm

Note that they are not the only socialist party. Unfortunately when it comes to elections people tend to only vote for the three main parties, it can be more a case of voting for the party that is most likely to beat the party you don't want. As none of the main parties are offering much socialism at this time it's not likely there will be a socialist government any time soon although there are still some socialist MPs in the Labour party. Back when Labour was more socialist though they did win seats and had Blair not changed the direction of the party, it's possible they could have still won the 1997 election.

 

[Snapper]

Back to the original point of the thread, it's generally true. A lot of it is linked to poverty, but that's often poverty of the imagination. Some of the most right wing people I've known would have benefited from being anything but - yet they saw themselves only in isolation rather than being part of something bigger, which has always been a strength and attraction of the left.

A large chunk of right wing ideology seems to be about finding someone to resent/blame for all your problems, rather than looking at oneself. Well, that and the need for demagogues - no matter how ridiculous...

 

[Temple Meads]

Being staunch left wing I hate to think of the Daily Mail trying to get into my good books.

It's a ghastly paper, though the website is a good deal better.

 

[Oswyntail]

....
A large chunk of right wing ideology seems to be about finding someone to resent/blame for all your problems, rather than looking at oneself. Well, that and the need for demagogues - no matter how ridiculous...

Surely the same can be said about "left-wing" ideology? "This is the man, the vary fat man, who waters the workers beer".
Perhaps one of the difficulties we have in discussing the political spectrum in the UK is that, in reality, all three political parties occupy much the same area of the spectrum, and that is quite some way to the left of the mean in other countries - and has been for over a century. OK, OT can talk about public/private ownership being the true divider, but none of the current main parties would argue for anything other than a mixed economy, with neither major privatisations or major nationalisations being considered. We get the apparently anomalous situation where the supposed "right wing" party is putting forward a programme of devolving responsibility to more local levels, following a "left wing" government that centralised power in the hands of an elite. Outside formal political groupings, though, there is as wide a range of views as in any country, and the holders of those views can happily espouse both right and left viewpoints. Trying to analyse the situation within those rigid boundaries is futile

 

[Snapper]

following a "left wing" government that centralised power in the hands of an elite.

Excuse me?

The Welsh Assembly? The Scottish Parliament? - and the opportunity for devolved powers in England - only the English were too stupid and suspicious to grasp the opportunity.

 

[Old Timer]

Excuse me?

The Welsh Assembly? The Scottish Parliament? - and the opportunity for devolved powers in England - only the English were too stupid and suspicious to grasp the opportunity.

Oddly enough I do not recall being given the opportunity to rid myself of the various hangers-on.

I would happily vote to have a truly free England, one free of the financial albratross of others. Problem is no-one asked me and no-one will.

The nearest we will get to it is when the Scots decide to bale out of the Union, and the sooner the better. Some of the most damaging of Labour's policies were intrinsically rejected by the population of England but were forced through by Scottish MPs, happy and hypocritical enough to force us to endure the very Legislation they voted against for themselves.

Strange that it is OK to ask the Scots if they want to go, but nobody is going to ask the English if THEY want the Union. Last time I looked, the larger percentage of the English were more than happy for Scotland to go its own way.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Being staunch left wing I hate to think of the Daily Mail trying to get into my good books.

It's a ghastly paper, though the website is a good deal better.

Another one not unfamiliar with the Daily Mail website, but first to critiise no doubt. I would call that hypocricy in my little world.

I dislke the Mirror, and I do not read it, neither do I go on the website, assuming there is one of course - I really cannot be bothered to even google it.

Irrespective of what you think on that very particular molehill of self-righteousness, nearly half of the readers of the Daily Mail do not subscribe to Right Wing policies nor do they vote for Conservative or Right Wing political parties.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Surely the same can be said about "left-wing" ideology? "This is the man, the vary fat man, who waters the workers beer".

Not in the Class War which Snapper subscribes to. Stereotypes are very much required in order to preach Socialism. The fact that Left Wing papers such as the Independent and the Guardian are losing readers week by week does not matter, in the same way that it does not matter that the general poluation of the UK is conservative with a small "c" and has not subscribed to Left Wing policies in any great way.

It is only this myth that the Left still perpetuate about anybody right of centre, and the propoganda fed to youngsters at school by the miltant leftist in the 70s and 80s especially.

It has always been in the interests of the Left to demonise private production and private employment. The reality so far as the Railways were concerned was that Privatisation has brought with it rates of pay and terms and conditions that could only have been dreamt of before.

The nearest thing we have to a Government controlled organisation is Network Rail, which has long since embarked on a policy of reducing the Ts&Cs of those wh were TUPE'd in from the Private Infrastructure Contractors. They also have a nice line in suppressing incident reporting and removing those who fail to toe the applied line of production above safety - try proposing a late Possession handback because you want to relieve tired staff sometime and see what happens. A combination of idealogical ideals and the unwillingness of the Trade Unions and others to admit they were wrong continues to do nothing other than damage the interests of their members. Left Wing cynicism in its true light.