Longitudinal studies provide some of the most convincing evidence. One such study looked at general intelligence in 10- and 11-year-old kids, and then re-studied those kids as adults two decades later—and found a clear connection between low intelligence and subsequent racism and sexism. Similarly, higher intelligence in childhood has been shown to predict less racism in adulthood. These analyses strongly suggest that low intelligence actually leads to hateful attitudes later on. This is just a sampling of the accruing evidence on this point, all of which points to another puzzling question: Why? Why would verbal ability and math skills and other cognitive assets translate, over the years, into such hateful attitudes? Dhont and Hodson believe they have an answer to this, again one based on rigorous abundant evidence. Their theory is that right-wing ideologies attract people with lower mental abilities because they minimize the complexity of the world. Right-wing ideologies offer well-structured and ordered views of society, views that preserve traditions and norms, so they are especially attractive to those who are threatened by change and want to avoid uncertainty and ambiguity. Conversely, smart people are more capable of grasping a world of nuance, fluidity and relativity. The empirical evidence supports this link, too. Low intelligence and “low effort thinking” are strongly linked to right-wing attitudes, including authoritarianism and conservative politics. And again, there appears to be a demonstrable causal link: Studies have found, for example, that children with poor mental skills grow up to be strongly right-wing adults. There is a final link in the chain of causality, according to Dhont and Hodson. Considerable evidence shows that conservative ideology predicts all sorts of prejudice—against ethnic and racial minorities, the disadvantaged, any outgroup. Indeed, right wingers are much more likely to see outgroups as a threat to traditional values and social order, resulting in heightened prejudice. Dhont and Hodson tested and confirmed this mediation model: Lower childhood intelligence clearly predicts right-wing ideology and attitude, which in turn predicts prejudice in adulthood. The scientists elaborate on this idea in the Current Directions article: Intelligence and thinking determine how people assess threats in the world. Those with lower ability—reasoning skills, processing speed, and so forth—prefer simple and predictable answers, because that is what they are capable of processing. Any uncertainty is threatening, and they respond to such threats by trying to preserve what is familiar and safe, the status quo. These conservative reactions are basic and normal—they reduce anxiety—but over time they harden into more stable and pervasive world views, which include stereotypical thinking, avoidance, prejudicial attitudes and over discrimination. The weight of evidence is hard to ignore, yet according to these scientists, it is conspicuously absent from contemporary theories of prejudice. They believe that it’s time for psychological scientists to stop ignoring the evidence—that in fact the field will benefit from open discussion of these controversial findings. The country might as well, and the events in Ferguson may well trigger that discussion. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/were-only-human/is-racism-just-a-form-of-stupidity.html
I have an idea. Trump has deleted his tweets supporting Roy Moore I just heard. To achieve something like this, the dream of many, would be quite difficult and legally hazardous as you are offering a cure which might only be partially effective. However... if we just use an ordinary icepick to damage the easily accessible Posterior Insula, the part of the brain that informs you when you are wrong, we can make Democrats into Republicans. They will be too stupid to know they are and therefore happy and confident. The best thing is we need only promise brain damage, not a cure and that is what we will give them.
Just out of curiosity, how do you meassure racism? Do you trust their word on saying how racist they are on a 1-10 scale? If you ask... Most "Smart" people would just say they aren't racist just to avoid controversy, regardless of the actual thoughts I guess you could say the same with sexism...
Here is a start All it takes to reduce support for housing assistance among Donald Trump supporters is exposure to an image of a black man. That’s the takeaway from a new study by researchers Matthew Luttig, Christopher Federico, and Howard Lavine, set to be published in Research & Politics. In a randomized survey experiment, the trio of researchers exposed respondents to images of either a white or black man. They found that when exposed to the image of a black man, white Trump supporters were less likely to back a federal mortgage aid program. Favorability toward Trump was a key measure for how strong this effect was. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/8/16270040/trump-clinton-supporters-racist
Bring married to a teacher I can tell you that this is not true in reality — meaning that this article and ”study” are completely biased. The majority of low performing, low intelligence students normally are aligned with the Democrats once they are over 18. Another data point to consider — when a crack ho baby mama has a child with a career criminal thug the offspring are very unlikely to be rocket scientists. There is a consistent trend of low intelligence children coming from single parent, impoverished, broken homes. I will give credit to teachers who work with each and every child in the elementary school years hoping that they will succeed — and break the cycle of dependence and poverty.
Where is your first data point? Where is your data for 'majority of low performing and low intelligence students' bit? Where is your STUDY? Go ask the teacher on how studies work.
How do studies work. From what you post, studies start with a preconceived political point then data is acquired to support the point -- and then you put out a politically biased "study" to support your bias. Naturally the study has nothing to do with actual reality.
As opposed to unsupported assertions based on nothing? You made a 'factual' statement and your evidence for that is 'I don't have to provide evidence because studies done to prove something are biased'. Also what exactly is controversial about racists being dumb and many of these racists being conservatives? You live in NC, is this news to you?
The actual source study says that low intelligence is related to prejudice and racism. It says nothing about political spectrum. Your article makes the assertion that somehow prejudice and racism is solely related to conservative people. Which is not true at all. There are plenty of left-wing people who are prejudice and racist. Go visit a low income housing project as a white person and get a dose of the prejudice and racism from low intelligence people on the left. Sadly there is plenty of prejudice and racism from people of all political spectrums in North America. It has a strong correlation to low intelligence and no real relationship to political spectrum.