Yale research accidentally proved liberals more racist than conservatives

submitted by [deleted] from (hotair.com)

all 35 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]SMCAB 8 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, they are talking about the people who demand you think like them, and virtue signal constantly but would slap a 5 year old kid if he had a Maga hat on.

[–]IkeConn 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Not a stretch. The live in crime riddled blue cities that have weak prosecutors and Texas ships them illegals.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Some liberals I met are the most racist and claim they aren't racist because they are liberals.

[–]Alienhunter 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (8 children)

It's fairly ironic. I've noticed a kind of racist trend from some who seem to think that racism means hate, rather than judging people based on their race.

You see this with the people who will call for lower standards for minorities because they "can't help it" when in reality they are basically admitting they consider the minorities inferior.

I think there's also a pretty important distinction to get made between Xenophobia and racism. Most conservatives tend to be some degree of xenophobic, but that has a tendency towards simply distrusting outsiders rather than making any racial judgements necessarily. Liberals on the other hand tend to be more xenophilic but hilariously often hold strong stereotypical attitudes that foreigners find off-putting. It's really a weird dynamic.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

All good points.

Adding my two cents:

'Racism' can be used to mean both hate and generalization ('they must all be killed' vs 'people sharing x characteristic seem to behave in x way').

Generalizing, using inductive reasoning, is an essential survival tool, as in ... 'child, avoid packs of hyenas!'

Denying people the right to use inductive reasoning condemns them to be stupid in an important way.

Also, in most countries in the world, xenophobia and racism are related, because states/countries tend to be nation-states.

But when a country consists of a brown soup of ethnicities, where the citizens are an amalgam of foreign-to-the-land peoples, well, then things get complicated.

Finally, I think that 'liberals' is a misnomer when used to describe those that are anything but liberal, especially when they exhibit totalitarian tendencies.

[–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Good points.

I agree that generalization itself is fine, but it's important to remember that generalizations are just that. I think a lot of people apply a generalization as a rule which is a logical fallacy. I've noticed this a lot when traveling, it's often a consequence of culture shock, people will act surprised when they see things that don't fit their expectations based on their generalizations. Often this is because the generalizations are not totally accurate, often they are accurate but you've stumbled onto the exception, often people's expectations are colored by tourist propoganda and the like and they don't seem to understand that the tourist ideal and the reality are a bit different, it's called the Paris syndrome, people have mental breakdowns when the romantic big city of love turns out to be a regular big city.

Avoiding the semantic argument of what is or is not a liberal. I think there's more a dynamic of people who are "flexible" vs people who are not.

Since liberals often tend to value and promote travel and cross cultural experiences, it's more likely that inflexible liberals will seek these out and end up getting culture shocked and exhibiting what we'd say are "racist" tendencies. Typically represents itself as picky eating, vapid idiotic comments that foreigners are different from what they are used to, lamenting how they aren't progressive on current culture war issue, etc.

Conservatives who are inflexible likely simply won't travel in the first place. Meaning that those who do travel tend to be the more flexible ones.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yes, generalizations are either accurate or ... not. All things being equal, inductive reasoning tends to create accurate generalizations. When some generalization is inaccurate and consistently wrong, it simply fades away, naturally.

Inaccurate generalizations need to be propped up by lies in order to survive. And that's, essentially, what e.g. Hollywood, advertising and other bullshit-manufacturing industries, do. They prop-up inaccurate generalizations and false narratives, presenting very rare exceptions as typical, and actual reality as never being the case.

As for 'liberals', being myself an actual liberal, I get annoyed when the term is used to refer to useful-idiots witlessly regurgitating government-corporate astroturf (in favour of compliance, censorship, disarming the citizenry, etc.), thinking that this is what 'liberalism' is.

Conservatism is not the opposite of liberalism, totalitarianism is.

[–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That's fair, but at that point we're getting into the semantic argument. I don't disagree with you, that's a completely accurate opinion of what the terms actually mean, they are not however how the terms are used in the popular discourse.

I'm speaking more of the general US split of everyone into two camps. That aren't easily defined but more or less all encompassing.

On this one metric conservatism vs liberalism can be described as simply a difference in philosophy as to whether resources should be allocated sparingly or liberally. Which is of course not how these terms are used in the common parlance.

I'd say I don't agree completely with the idea that generalizations naturally correct themselves in optimal conditions. Though I suppose that will also lead to a discussion about what optimal conditions are. I'd argue that some misconceptions tend to be self perpetuating as a simple consequence of them being the initial conclusion people will draw with a shallow understanding of the issue in question. And the majority of people will never have the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of any issue, leading to the misconception being the "common sense" answer.

It's hard to provide specific examples to this as most people won't understand them. I suppose one easy to understand model would be the claim that "the moon is upside down in Australia" which seems utterly stupid but is actually true when you consider perspective. At least when compared with the northern hemisphere.

I also think people hold somewhat inaccurate generalizations of their own culture as well that they simply don't question because they haven't needed to change their perspective. One of these I'd criticize is the American value of "freedom" which Americans seem to believe is a unique aspect of their society while simultaneously living in one of the most litigious societies with a number of very intrusive local ordinances that seem to have all sorts of dictates on what you can and cannot do. Is that freedom? I guess you could easily argue that this belief is due to propoganda though. Freedom isn't exactly an issue that can be easily measured and compared after all.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The moon example is not a case of generalization, and, in any case, it can be demonstrated simply, within seconds, ending any possible misunderstanding, otherwise, yes, good points all.

[–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not a case of generalization perhaps. It. Sn be demonstrated simply if you understand the concept. Regardless it had been one that I've gotten immediate pushback for mentioning in the past because people outrightly reject it.

It's very difficult to give examples. Most racial stereotypes ring true on a very basic level but most of the time they themselves seem very much intertwined with people's own idea of their own strengths.

You'll see in the west they've got a very strong idea that they value individuality as opposed to the east Asian cultures that value collectivism, this isn't entirely wrong, but it's not exactly correct either. It doesn't take much more than a quick look at American pop culture towards whatever the Hollywood issue of the year is to see the American tendency towards collective cultural opinion for example. And in the case of china, the dissenting opinions are suppressed outright leaving only the state approved "collectivist" opinions remaining. In my opinion, while it's obviously wrong to assume both situations are the same, they seem to resemble each other to me.

[–]niggerjewfaggot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Bullshit - as usual - but what's different with Hot Air is that they admit they are merely interpreting a report. And of course Hot Air get's it wrong, because they're far right racist shitheads.

Read for yourself: https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/white-liberals-present-themselves-as-less-competent-in-interactions-with-african-americans

Admitting a lack of competence in understanding the "other" is a form of awareness that is of course the OPPOSITE OF RACIST

The dumbest, racist assholes assume to know more than they actually know. Racism is all about the unfounded assumptions of the stupid fucks like the Hot Air fascists. Idiots are OFTEN over-confident. Indians call Americans 'oversmart' because of the typical American over-confidence that contrasts their actual knowledge. Trump was the ideal representative for many of these oversmart dipshits. The US should stop importing its scientists, engineers and doctors, and should insead properly fund the education system. Republicans should also stop thinking about childrens' possible sexual interests, should stop attacking academecs, schools, teachers, and libraries, ffs.

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 7 insightful - 7 fun7 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 7 fun -  (5 children)

What's it like being a raging faggot?

[–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You've wanted to know so badly that you'll be out of the closet soon enough and will have your answer.

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If I were in the closet, though, I'd already know.

[–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

You've wanted to know so badly that you'll be out of the closet soon enough and will have your answer.

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You think I've got a shot at a Thai lady-boy, or are you thinking more Pulp Fiction gimp action?

[–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm saying you're asking the right questions for someone who is genuinely interested in the answers.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    You know I respond to Saidit's disinformation. Nothing new

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    (((academics)))

    [–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Why the ((( ?

    Is this a new trend on Parler?

    [–]StillLessons 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    The entire liberal social premise for 40 years minimum has been racism. Affirmative action is officially codified racism. These Yale researchers are being given yet another example of what has been obvious from the start. Treating a group of people explicitly according to their race IS racism. Whatever the good intentions behind that racism, the results will be the same: those who accept being lumped together by their race will lose true pride in themselves (which is always a function of merit and results attained through individual effort applied) and end up with pathological self-esteem issues. We now have several generations of the results of this philosophy, demonstrating how it plays out at different phases of life.

    Human delusion is endless.

    [–]MagicMike 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    Blacks vote for racist Democrats BECAUSE Democrats dumb down their speech. Think of the word ‘niggardly’; you can get fired for saying that to a black audience because…well, they’re semi-literate savages.

    [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    The party of the KKK thinks blacks are dumb? Shocked I tell you, shocked.

    [–]sproketboy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Post to reddit for the ban!

    [–]Feldheld 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Theyre always projecting. Whatever they accuse you of is what they themselves are guilty of. Theyre eternal children, never maturing into adults. So they practice all life long to bring their childishness to perfection.

    [–]MagicMike 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Data shows that 74% of Cook County, of which South Shore is a part, voted for Biden, while only 24% voted for Trump.

    Reports claim that residents of South Shore voted for Biden by a whopping 97%.

    This what they voted for.

    — Gateway Pundit

    [–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    "More racist" isn't exactly what was found.

    There are more possible reasons for downshifting competence than thinking your audience is less intelligent. Wishing to appear less highfalutin to one group and not another might be done out of an estimate of what they value, or so as an act of humility to a group who would see you as an outsider.

    [–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    I wrote something like that in my response to this post.

    [–]MuskyIndependent 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Ah yes, the left aren't the racists, excellent point u/niggerfaggotjew.

    [–]niggerjewfaggot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    ✊🏿

    [–]passionflounderIndependent 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    The hidden lesson to what unfolds needs to be the fact that while our technology evolves, our tools and toys become more complex and advanced, and as individual sense of self become increasingly entangled in a sort of cultural cultural "Borg" that delivers a collective set of values attached to pop and political culture, the human recipient remains completely unevolved.

    This means that we are every bit as vulnerable to repeating historical mistakes and being unwitting accessories to crimes committed against targeted groups such as in 1930's-1945 Germany.

    I think that it's quite telling that the so-called "educational" system de-emphasizes history and civics in favor of demagoguery curriculum like social/racial justice.

    It says to me that the purveyors of the rising lefto-fascist global State know exactly what they are doing- engineering a repeat of ugly history by knowingly interfering with people learning from it. They need to be held criminally liable after we somehow pry the levers of power from their death grip.

    [–]MagicMike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    It’s not racist to dumb down speech, relative to the audience.

    [–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    No, but there's a very fine line between simplifying your message for mass appeal and patronizing your audience. There's also a problem where, while it's definitely justified to simplify things for a less refined audience, one can lean too hard into that and fail to have the audience grow in their understanding.

    This is an issue with language teaching, when teaching a language at first it's beneficial to talk extremely slowly and simply, but if you don't up the level and push people past their comfort zone they'll be useless when it comes to real life circumstances. This leads to the "Spanish people talk too fast" type of comments, they don't talk too fast, you understand too slow.

    [–]MagicMike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    A black audience likely will have a mean IQ of 85. If you speak to them like you would a White audience, they will first get bored, then irritated, and finally angry (white supremacy). Of course, a black physician or engineer (likely a lot of white ancestors) would understand everything you said but most blacks won’t. It’s rather pointless to try.

    [–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I'm convinced that "African American" is just liberal for the n-word.