Scrutinize the political affiliation of white males in the labor force. Why do you think liberals constitute the vast plurality of professors, scientists, philosophers, and IT professionals? And have you noticed that most racists and right-wing conservatives are christian whites who lack higher education? Don't you ever think that you may be the indoctrinated one -- the one who lacks the intellectual capacity to fathom anything which transcends your emotions? Don't discern this as an attack against your beliefs. I'm a moderate myself. This is just a really makes you think scenario.
>educated
>don't believe in the bible or God
>believe in evolution
>believe in global warming
>believe in Communism
>believe in race
>>127916918
To be fair there is a huge liberal bias in academia so conservatives might be more likely to go into industry and be successful there.
>>127916918
>higher education
sorry sweetie but those places are anti-white propaganda.
Liberals are creative and tend to be open to new ideas and concepts.
Conservatives are orderly and value tradition and structure.
Both traits are important, but the former allows liberals to advance in some fields.
read gramci
correlation of political affiliation and iq =/= causality
if you control the system, everyone will think like the system wants you to think
the national socialists had an above average iq and were highly educated
Pluralities are not vast, dipshit.
>>127916918
Because if you don't you don't get money for research because at the end of the day science founding comes from the government and you most adhere to their interests.
>>127916918
Look at what happened to James Watson. Scientists are often afraid to question the government's (((narrative))) so that their funding doesn't get cut. And notice how people who reject race realism and evolutionary psychology use creationist-tier arguments.
Because they tend to want a better society and value human well being over money. Also the right actively try to take away their jobs/get them paid less.
>>127917575
This.
There are only a handful of people with the knowledge and wisdom required to inform a culture. How many professors in history are remembered today? And they were educated at a higher level and encouraged to develope taste.
Sorry, but Noam Chomsky will never beat a Johnson or a Hamilton.
>>127917802
Additionally, though it is counter intuitive, people with high intelligence are more likely to fall for scams.
>>127917575
This
>>127916918
the commies were liberals.
murdered 100 million people.
also Left/Right paradigm, really?
Also:
Study Shows Smart Liberals, Conservatives, and Libertarians Are Easiest to Fool
We reason to persuade, not to find truth.
http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/04/often-wrong-never-in-doubt
also: recently a study that bothered to study LIBERTARIANS found we are smarter than conservatives AND 'liberals' who are actually statists.
You also might examine if/why The Academy might self select liberals... people who 'can not do...'
I doubt most philosophers are 'liberal' in the modern statist cryptototalitarian sense