Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCIENCE

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Hawknc, Zamfir, Prelates, Moderators General

Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCIENCE

Postby omgryebread » Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:39 pm UTC

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html

Spoiler:
There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.
The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.
"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.
Controversy ahead
The findings combine three hot-button topics.
"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."
Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]
"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."
Brains and bias
Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]
In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.
Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)
As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.
People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.
"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.
A study of averages
Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.
"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.
Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.
"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."
Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.
"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."
In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]
Simple viewpoints
Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.
The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.
"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."
Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.
"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.


Okay, or at least racists and social conservatives tend to have lower IQ as children, which is a far shot from saying they are dumb. They basically tested overt racism and social views by a survey, and people who were racist tended to be socially conservative, and have lower IQs in childhood.

They didn't do any corresponding study of liberal views, as the article notes, so it's a far shot from being able to say conservatives are stupid (not that I don't do it anyway, but I never needed science to do that), but it's still neat and interesting.
avatar from Nononono by Lynn Okamoto.
User avatar
omgryebread
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:03 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby lutzj » Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:53 pm UTC

Racism is dumb. You'd expect stupid people to give in to their groupist tendencies.

I'm not sure how you could explain the social conservatism side of the study but then I don't know precisely what social views were examined.
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.
User avatar
lutzj
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Роберт » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:08 pm UTC

When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody.
Another variable you could add is "race".

Racism by race. That would be a funny study. Imagine the headline: Study shows <race x members> more racist than <race y members>.
Although I guess people already do political ideology and race without TOO much of an uproar.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.
Роберт
 
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Dauric » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:19 pm UTC

The interesting thing about this study if you get in to the article is that they're not just saying "conservative=racist=dumb", but they've been making an attempt to correlate -why- low IQ, conservatism and racism coincide. Studies showing that exposure to people with a different ethnicity works the brain harder, and studies that show people who test low on IQ scores tend to be adverse to change (conservative) as examples in the article.

Now all this study is really doing is taking multiple other studies and finding correlations, like a lot of research and studies that make headlines these days, and on the count of three now: 1.. 2.. 3..

"Correlation does not imply causation..."

"...but it does waggle it's eyebrows suggestively while pointing furtively and mouthing the words 'look over there'."

So it would be interesting if some directed research came out of this study to determine if there's causation or not.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. Later, Garrus was eaten by a shark. It is believed that the Point has perished in the accident. Back to you Bob.
User avatar
Dauric
 
Posts: 3199
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: If I knew this with any accuracy I wouldn't know if I was going to get a speeding ticket.

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Not A Raptor » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:33 pm UTC

Hm... A possible explanation could be tied to the tendency of those holding extreme viewpoints (whether "otherist" (I use otherist to generalize from racism and expand the results to chauvinism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc....) or political extremes on any side of any spectrum...) simply shutting down questions they don't like. Asking questions and getting a positive response to the act of asking would seem like the sort of thing that promotes critical thinking. Getting a negative response to the same would seem to be something that would discourage critical thinking. As critical thinking goes hand in hand with intelligence in general, getting taught that asking 'problematic' questions at a young age would have a negative impact on intelligence. At least if what I think is accurate.

:/ It needs work if it's to be testable, though.
Van wrote:I like simple games.

Like Wizardry.

WARNING: Is acting like NaR.
Kellsbells: NAR is a sillypants
Not_A_Raptor: :p
Kellsbells: That is my expert assessment
User avatar
Not A Raptor
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:06 pm UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby folkhero » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:35 am UTC

Dauric wrote:Now all this study is really doing is taking multiple other studies and finding correlations, like a lot of research and studies that make headlines these days

I know, we can link this one with the "smart people party harder" study and we can determine that people are racist and socially conservative because they don't party enough.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...
User avatar
folkhero
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Magnanimous » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:38 am UTC

Роберт wrote:[Racism by race. That would be a funny study. Imagine the headline: Study shows <race x members> more racist than <race y members>.
Although I guess people already do political ideology and race without TOO much of an uproar.

Study shows <race x members> more likely to think <race y members> are more racist than <race z members>.

WE HAVE TO GO DEEPER.
Starship Icarus wrote:All you need to know is that instead of swearing, we now use the names of extinct Earth species. Like you'd say, "What the panda!", or "Bullshit!", or "What's up, dog?"
User avatar
Magnanimous
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:11 pm UTC
Location: Land of Hipsters and Rain (LOHAR)

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Vaniver » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:45 am UTC

Notice that they tested overt racism. Perhaps cleverer folks know to hide it?
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.
User avatar
Vaniver
 
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:33 am UTC

I'm more curious about the general application of this conclusion which is: are people who hold dumb opinions more likely to be idiots?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby folkhero » Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:37 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I'm more curious about the general application of this conclusion which is: are people who hold dumb opinions more likely to be idiots?

I'd say not necessarily, the smarter you are, the better you are at justifying stupid opinions.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...
User avatar
folkhero
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Dauric » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 pm UTC

folkhero wrote:
Dauric wrote:Now all this study is really doing is taking multiple other studies and finding correlations, like a lot of research and studies that make headlines these days

I know, we can link this one with the "smart people party harder" study and we can determine that people are racist and socially conservative because they don't party enough.


And yet I find this conclusion to be oddly compelling. To improve society we must party more!
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. Later, Garrus was eaten by a shark. It is believed that the Point has perished in the accident. Back to you Bob.
User avatar
Dauric
 
Posts: 3199
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: If I knew this with any accuracy I wouldn't know if I was going to get a speeding ticket.

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:20 pm UTC

I think Jersey Shore disproves the notion that partying makes you smarter.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Belial » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:21 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:Notice that they tested overt racism. Perhaps cleverer folks know to hide it?


That sounds about right for the racism. It describes my quite intelligent, incredibly racist father quite well. If he thought you might possibly judge him, he covered quite nicely.

That said, it doesn't really explain the social conservative views in general, since many of those are much more socially acceptable.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30232
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Dauric » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:29 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Vaniver wrote:Notice that they tested overt racism. Perhaps cleverer folks know to hide it?


That sounds about right for the racism. It describes my quite intelligent, incredibly racist father quite well. If he thought you might possibly judge him, he covered quite nicely.

That said, it doesn't really explain the social conservative views in general, since many of those are much more socially acceptable.


The thing is that racism doesn't have a strong organizational backing (at least not today, there's still supporting organizations, but they don't -publicly- count large swaths of the population as members). Social conservatism is frequently backed by various flavors of the Christian religion, and associated bureaucracies and lobbying funds, and Christianity in one form or another is the largest religion by membership in the world. It's relatively simple to be publicly socially conservative and not be worried about being socially ostracized for the sentiment. Racism (again, today) doesn't have that advantage so expressions of racism tend to be more nuanced or subverted in the company of people the racist doesn't know well.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. Later, Garrus was eaten by a shark. It is believed that the Point has perished in the accident. Back to you Bob.
User avatar
Dauric
 
Posts: 3199
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: If I knew this with any accuracy I wouldn't know if I was going to get a speeding ticket.

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:36 pm UTC

Belial wrote:That sounds about right for the racism. It describes my quite intelligent, incredibly racist father quite well. If he thought you might possibly judge him, he covered quite nicely.

That might explain it for some people, but for others I think it's just about the fact that they've never really encountered a person of another race, so if they get the idea of racism in their heads, it's not an idea that can be easily countered by meeting people, and your friends and family might not want to raise the issue.

For example, my dad had an uncle (Jewish, like the rest of his family) who was a nice, intelligent guy, and totally racist against African-Americans. He would blame them entirely for problems like poor education and high crime rates because they're just naturally stupid or immoral. I don't think he'd ever met one. My dad wouldn't contest it, he'd just simply say something like "Alright, uncle," and move on. And I bet that if he saw a nice black person, like if I brought my friend, he'd try to rationalize it, thinking something like "well of course he's nice, he was raised Jewish."

I'm not sure where I was going with this. I think it's that smart people can be racist for a lot of reasons.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Iulus Cofield » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:17 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
Belial wrote:
Vaniver wrote:Notice that they tested overt racism. Perhaps cleverer folks know to hide it?


That sounds about right for the racism. It describes my quite intelligent, incredibly racist father quite well. If he thought you might possibly judge him, he covered quite nicely.

That said, it doesn't really explain the social conservative views in general, since many of those are much more socially acceptable.


The thing is that racism doesn't have a strong organizational backing (at least not today, there's still supporting organizations, but they don't -publicly- count large swaths of the population as members). Social conservatism is frequently backed by various flavors of the Christian religion, and associated bureaucracies and lobbying funds, and Christianity in one form or another is the largest religion by membership in the world. It's relatively simple to be publicly socially conservative and not be worried about being socially ostracized for the sentiment. Racism (again, today) doesn't have that advantage so expressions of racism tend to be more nuanced or subverted in the company of people the racist doesn't know well.


Exactly! That's why I rarely mention how much I hate Brazilians.
User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
 
Posts: 2931
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby nitePhyyre » Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:42 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Belial wrote:That sounds about right for the racism. It describes my quite intelligent, incredibly racist father quite well. If he thought you might possibly judge him, he covered quite nicely.

That might explain it for some people, but for others I think it's just about the fact that they've never really encountered a person of another race, so if they get the idea of racism in their heads, it's not an idea that can be easily countered by meeting people, and your friends and family might not want to raise the issue.
I've actually noticed the reverse trend also.

My father was born into a family 8. They grew up in a post-war development project.They were all raised to be tolerant. My father and 4 of his siblings moved up into the middle class, and moved out into the suburbs. The other 3 still live in the ghetto they grew up in, except now it is full of non-white immigrants. The portion of the family who deals with members of other races daily say some of the most racist shit I've ever heard. My father says he has no idea where that sentiment came from, and if my grandparents were alive to hear what their children were saying, they would be appalled.

I think it in part has to do with selection bias and lack of cultural integration for immigrants.

tl;dr: I don't know all the factors, but it is more complicated than exposure vs. non-exposure.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.
nitePhyyre
 
Posts: 1279
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Arrian » Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:32 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:Now all this study is really doing is taking multiple other studies and finding correlations, like a lot of research and studies that make headlines these days, and on the count of three now: 1.. 2.. 3..

"Correlation does not imply causation..."

"...but it does waggle it's eyebrows suggestively while pointing furtively and mouthing the words 'look over there'."

So it would be interesting if some directed research came out of this study to determine if there's causation or not.


Actually, they didn't even really look for direct correlation, but found correlation between some variables that they constructed out of a lot of data, (i.e. they didn't directly measure IQ, and pulled the answers to a small group of questions out of a larger survey to construct proxies for both racism and conservatism.) Then they threw statistics at a very large sample and surprisingly enough came up with statistically significant results:

Briggs wrote:They first modeled the intelligence questions to create one “latent” (unobserved) measure, called “g”. The uncertainty in creating “g” is then ignored in all subsequent analysis. They did the same for the attitude questions, creating a “latent” (actually unobserved) variable called “conservative ideology.” Uncertainty in its creation is also ignored. Then the individuals’ education and socioeconomic status and separately their parent’s socioeconomic status (which again were the results of models) were put into a model with “g” and “conservative ideology” to predict “racism” (the uncertainty of which, as was already said, was ignored). The picture below summarizes their findings.


Intelligence (g) is highly significant but has a tiny effect on racism (-0.01 for men, +0.02 for women.) The fact that the sign is different for men and women is a very big red flag: Why would more intelligent women be more racist but more intelligent men be less? What theory do they expound to explain that?

"Conservative beliefs" has a stronger impact (0.69 and 0.51 for men and women respectively), but that classification is far more open to data mining. The researchers chose 13 answers out of a 50 question survey to model conservatism, how did they choose those? What were their criteria? What if they chose 14 questions, or 12? The same can be said for their measure of racism.

I haven't found the paper myself, but this seems to be the abstract and cite.
Arrian
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Arancaytar » Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:28 am UTC

folkhero wrote:
Dauric wrote:Now all this study is really doing is taking multiple other studies and finding correlations, like a lot of research and studies that make headlines these days

I know, we can link this one with the "smart people party harder" study and we can determine that people are racist and socially conservative because they don't party enough.


- "We're having a party Friday night. You coming?"
- "I'm studying."
- "You racist!"
"You cannot dual-wield the sharks. One is enough." -Our DM.
Image
User avatar
Arancaytar
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 am UTC
Location: 50.099432 degrees north, 8.572756 degrees east.

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby Jahoclave » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:21 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:Notice that they tested overt racism. Perhaps cleverer folks know to hide it?

And in general, the reality of racism is not an overt racism. So, being an overt racist already places you in an interesting position outside of the mainstream. Which, is exactly where you would expect overt racism to be cropping up, in the excluded.

Intelligence (g) is highly significant but has a tiny effect on racism (-0.01 for men, +0.02 for women.) The fact that the sign is different for men and women is a very big red flag: Why would more intelligent women be more racist but more intelligent men be less? What theory do they expound to explain that?

If I offered a guess, women, though more intelligent are placed in a more subjectivized position than men. So, because they inherently have less power, they are more threatened, have less control, etc... Which then leads to a rise in fundamentalists positions. And, if they're subscribing to a conservative ideology, well, we know how much that 'hates' women.

Kind of reminds me of something Zizek wrote: he applauded modern society on it's maturity in the economic meltdown because, at least this time, we didn't blame the Jews.
User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
 
Posts: 4725
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby xkcdfan » Tue Jan 31, 2012 9:18 am UTC

Wasn't this study, or one very much like it, debunked a year or so ago?
User avatar
xkcdfan
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:10 am UTC

Re: Racists, social conservatives are dumb, according to SCI

Postby PaulNoir » Thu May 31, 2012 2:38 pm UTC

Well, just adding a concept to consider in regards to this study.
I'm a racist, like it or no. But, I don't allow outward expressions of it to show. I acknowledge that racially motivated views are inherently incorrect... but it's easy to recognize that. Much more difficult to put it into play.
So far as causation, I grew up in a hick farm town in California. Those of you familiar with those areas will know that the ethnic minorities (in may particular town, African-Americans, 1%) are generally impoverished, and tend to take out the related frustrations on "the other side". So, much of my contact with other ethnicities was negative.
While in my adult life (sure as hell not in that dump of a town) my experience has greatly differed from my early life, it's extremely difficult to step away from the ideas reinforced in childhood.

In short, I'm by no means conservative, and I'd like to think I keep my racist actions in check... but fact remains that the ideas are still there. And I'd be inclined to think that I'm far from the only person like this.
So, if I'm not alone, it'd be impossible to get an accurate read on the intelligence of "non-racist" progressives to compare data, as only outright fools proclaim themselves to be racist.
PaulNoir
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 2:15 pm UTC


Return to News & Articles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mat.tia, Thesh and 6 guests