RSS
With a few glaring exceptions, such as the late James Flynn, Leftists are systematically less interested in the truth than conservatives. Or to put it more bluntly, they lie more often. Thus a major research project has shown that, when findings in psychology have proven fraudulent, the findings almost always support Leftist ideology.
Leftists lie for myriad reasons. One is that they are systematically more mentally unbalanced than conservatives. High in Machiavellianism and vulnerable Narcissism, they crave status and adoration to deal with their feelings of low self-esteem, powerlessness and high mental instability. Those feelings cause them to fear a fair fight, and they therefore seek power covertly by virtue signalling about such matters as “equality.” This particularly true for women: Over half of young, female Leftists suffer anxiety or depression.
An example of their dishonesty: the way in which their actions speak louder than their words. “I think all races have equal intelligence,” a Leftist will say in denying average IQ differences between whites, blacks, and Asians. But he will then speak to blacks more simply than to whites, implying that he believes black people are less intelligent. See Self-Presentation in Interracial Settings: The Competence Downshift by White Liberals, by Cydney H. Dupree Susan T. Fiske, psyarxiv.com, September 7, 2018.
In contrast, conservatives will say “treat everyone equally” and so speak to blacks and whites in exactly the same fashion, regardless of perceived intelligence differences.
Another example: Despite their oft-stated affection for minorities, wealthy Leftists are often like Bill and Hillary Clinton, who live in overwhelmingly white Chappaqua, New York. A university education gave them all the right attitudes about minorities, as Joe Sobran quipped, and the money and means to move as far away from them as possible
The point is, Leftists score higher on the “lie scale” than conservatives. They are more inclined to lie, especially to present themselves in a positive light [Corrigendum to “The nature of the relationship between personality traits and political attitudes (Personal. Individ. Differ. 49 (2010): 306–316), by B. Verhulst et al., Personality and Individual Differences, September 2016].
So we shouldn’t be surprised to find that when an academic assembles research findings in psychology that do not replicate—often due to initial data manipulation and other dishonest techniques—they turn out overwhelmingly to be studies that purport to prove Left-wing ideas.
The University of Bristol’s Gavin Leech’s ongoing “Reversals in Psychology” project has found precisely this trend, although it fails to focus on this leftist-conservative difference. For helping with the project, Leech thanks such psychologists as Stuart Ritchie of Edinburgh University, who virtue-signals with a Ukraine flag in his Twitter bio and has blocked me for some reason.
But rather than speculate on Leech’s motives, let’s have a look at some of his noteworthy findings:
- No good evidence shows “tribalism” forms around arbitrary characteristics, which would mean strong groups develop for purely environmental reasons. Social groups are a way of indirectly passing on genes, so even friends tend to be more genetically similar than chance would predict, as J. Philippe Rushton proved [Ethnic Nationalism: Evolutionary Psychology and Genetic Similarity Theory, by J. Philippe Rushton, Nations and Nationalism, September 27, 2005].
- The evidence that “implicit bias” training helps combat “racism” is so weak as to be virtually meaningless, and the reliability of the test instrument is unacceptably low.
- The “Pygmalion Effect”—that a teacher’s expectations improve a pupil’s performance, or colloquially, that a student will rise to the level of the expectations he is given—which would explain why “marginalized” pupils don’t do very well, is generally nonsense.
- The evidence for “stereotype threat”—that individuals absorb a stereotype that their group isn’t good at something, which in turn makes them bad at it—is so weak as to be meaningless.
- The concept of “multiple intelligences,” which suggests that everyone is “intelligent” in his own way—such as “emotionally,” athletically, or existentially—is inaccurate, and even the academic who proposed it in the 1980s now admits this.
- Studies that find that IQ is mainly environmental, and can be permanently increased by environmental intervention, do not replicate and are “highly suspicious.”
- No good evidence shows that teachers who tailor their teaching methods to the supposed specific needs of pupils—such as teaching black and minority students differently than whites and with less discipline—has any positive effect.
- One finding that I found particularly interesting: There is no correlation between the prestige of an academic journal and the likelihood that its findings can be replicated. Leftists have taken over all of the most prestigious journals and will duly mock research, and try to dismiss it with appeals to authority, if it is published in low-status journals. But this is pretty much compulsory if the findings question Leftist dogmas. Yet here we have clear evidence that the findings published in “prestigious” journals are not guaranteed to be correct. The relationship between “correctness” (in that it can be replicated) and “journal prestige” is zero.
However, for me the most interesting finding: the political skew to fraudulent, poor-quality, or otherwise unreplicable research.
As far as I can tell, Leech’s project highlights 23 instances of research that is either highly environmentalist or substantiates left-wing ideas that do not replicate or for which there is, at best, “very weak evidence.”
By contrast, the project highlights 11 cases of such questionable research in evolutionary psychology or research that appear to substantiate conservative perspectives, including studies on the possible existence of a spiritual world. (A number of the studies, such as those with regard to the influence of brain hemispheres, led to neither Leftist nor conservative results}.
So, if we’re being generous to Leftist researchers, then their research is three times more unreliable than research that leads to conservative findings.
But what if we’re simply fair?
The 23 Leftist research findings include the case of Dutch social psychologist Diederik Stapel, who has so far retracted an astonishing 58 fraudulent studies. Stapel deliberately concocted data, including such findings as people who eat meat being more selfish and that being exposed to litter, or an abandoned bicycle, promotes stereotyping:
- Committee: Dutch professor faked data for years, by Toby Sterling, The Associated Press, November 3, 2011
- Coping with chaos: how disordered contexts promote stereotyping and discrimination, By D.A. Stapel and S. Lindenberg, Science, 2011
The 23 Leftist examples also include studies by Brian Wansink, formerly of Cornell University, no less than 50 of whose studies contain “fatal errors” due to the “gross malpractice” of manipulating data.
In terms of “conservative” research, studies by the German-British psychologist Hans Eysenck have invited 26 “expressions of concern.” These include “the validity of the datasets, including the ‘recruitment of participants, administration of measures, reliability of outcome ascertainment, biases in data collection, absence of relevant covariates, and selection of cases analysed in each article’” [Expression of concern: Articles by Hans J. Eysenck, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2020]. A number of Eysenck’s papers have been retracted due to these “expressions of concern” [Retraction Notice, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2020].
But an “expression of concern” is not proof of fraud or malpractice and Eysenck can’t defend himself because he died in 1997.
But even so, we can now say that 78 percent of the instances of fraudulent, manipulated and otherwise poor research led to results that are in line with Leftist ideas. If we dismiss the “expressions of concern,” as justice to Eysenck demands we must—then 92 percent of the cases of bad research involve Leftist findings.
Put simply, fraudulent, manipulated research is overwhelmingly conducted by Leftists. These results, as I have discussed before, suggest that universities—now dominated by Leftists—are no longer interested in the pursuit of objective truth, but instead are more interested in enforcing dogmatic compliance with leftist ideology.
Leftists are liars and if they take over universities, then research by academics can be expected to be lies. And this is exactly what’s happened.
Students who pay hefty tuition will be increasingly subjected to lectures and material that are nothing but Leftist lies. Which is another reason why we can expect the College Bubble to burst.
Edward Dutton (email him | Tweet him) is Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Asbiro University, Łódź, Poland. You can see him on his Jolly Heretic video channels on YouTube and Bitchute. His books are available on his home page here.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Although I can believe the general gist of the article, I fail to see how Mr. Dutton concludes that:
“their [Leftist] research is three times more unreliable than research that leads to conservative findings.”
and
“we can now say that 78 percent of the instances of fraudulent, manipulated and otherwise poor research led to results that are in line with Leftist ideas.”
from the numbers of 23 questionable leftist studies and 11 questionable conservative studies – I’d say that amounts to ˜twice as fraudulent, and ˜66%. I have not followed any of the links – am I missing something?
“Leftists” lie for the same reason Dutton tells half-truths: because the Jews would destroy the leftists if they didn’t lie. Likewise, the Jews would destroy Dutton if he called out the Jew: as with Jordan Peterson, Dutton simply “can’t go there”. Everyone is afraid because the Jews are just too powerful: Jews have shaped the worldview of the population of the West; Jews have created the second reality matrix in which people in the West live; and most are trapped in a mind prison. Few of us escape.
Of the few who have escaped the Jew mind prison, a fair percentage did so by studying the IQ question, starting with the work of Richard Lynn. Lynn can open one’s eyes to the difference in IQ between nations, which can then lead to the work of J. Philippe Rushton on the difference in IQ between races (though Dutton has pointed out that Rushton himself committed academic malpractice). But then, lo and behold, as soon as you even mention the possibility of the existence of differences in intelligence between races you are immediately attacked: “racist!”
Then you ask yourself why the hell you can’t talk about the race and IQ question in public and that will lead you straight to the Jewish Question: it’s the Jews, stupid! So it’s the Jews who hijacked the structure of reality itself, forbidding any public discussion on this topic! Now it all makes sense! And you soon learn that the Jews’ power is so awesome and relentless that if you touch that third rail of public discourse you are instantaneous toast. The Jews will crush you mercilessly if you ever dare to mention in public that the Jews have power.
So what’s the antidote? How can we escape the mind prison where the Jews have trapped us? A good start would be to read Kevin MacDonald’s trilogy on the Jews, especially Culture of Critique, the second chapter of which MacDonald has just updated. Just the first few words of that chapter will help us understand what’s really going on, much more so than anything Dutton has written here:
So there you go – that is the real reason why leftists lie; that is the origin of this wailing wall of lies: the entrance of Jews into the social sciences. Sure, we can add a few of Dutton’s reasons for why leftists lie into the equation as well, but they are merely ancillary and don’t get to the heart of the matter. MacDonald’s arguments have much more explosive explanatory power: they blow you right out of the Jew-created mind prison. MacDonald’s theory is so pervasively applicable to academia that he should rename his trilogy with a smilar subtitle as the one in the book Intelligence by Richard Lynn: MacDonald’s newly renamed trilogy would thus be called Jewish Power — The Unifying Construct of the Social Sciences.
That Sobran quote is just baloney – the ‘Dissident Right’ needs to STOP reciting it!
Liberals are (much) more likely to miscegenate than conservatives.
I have a novel proposal for a permanent IQ-raising regime.
In retrospect, it’s obvious it has to look more like a gym schedule than a reading schedule. You can teach someone else to be smart exactly to the extent you can teach someone to lift heavy things. If you want to be fit, physically or mentally, at some point you have to do the reps.
It worked on me, but that’s n=1. I would like to raise the n.
It should in fact raise IQ test performance, since it raises it on all other g-loaded tasks.
No, going to school doesn’t look anything like a repetition. Nor is there anything inherent to reading a book that looks like a repetition. Books can be used, if used intentionally as a rep with the required preparation. A school has to be twisted into a pretzel to be useful.
Of course, it is probably more useful on folks who already have high IQ. It most likely widens gaps, rather than closing them.
Which is probably why I get to be the discoverer. (Or at least the write-downer.) Everyone else only wants to close the gaps – I only want to raise the peaks.
Wealthy leftists in fact do keep their distance from Darks. Where do they buy houses, for example?
The mixing most often occurs among their daughters, having been lied to all their lives by their parents. Some of the sharper Negroes know this and actively seek to marry up with a silly White girl. The Negro gets subsidized by the in-laws, who can’t bear to see their child and grandchildren live in relative squalor. He gets smarter and less troublesome kids than he would have gotten from a Negress. He can have Black girlfriends on the side. A good life strategy for him.
Could have been a selection effect. The Regime will support you when you lie for it, but not if you lie for other reasons. It isn’t, but it could have been.
Leftism itself is based on lies.
Rightism is inequality and responsibility.
Leftism is Egalitarianism and irresponsibility. They can’t just come out and say everyone is bit-for-bit identical, because it’s so stupid even they can’t take it seriously. Likewise, when someone screws up and wants to make it your fault instead of theirs, they can’t just say so. Slavery, stereotype thread, blah blah whatever. 100% AAA lies.
Leftism is based on irresponsibility because it’s about attracting supporters who can’t take care of themselves. They must, as a matter of survival, parasitize on the host society. They’re dangerous because they plain want it more.
Wet streets cause rain. They fear a fair fight because they’re rationally aware they will lose, and therefore develop sneaky personalities. Secondarily, Egalitarianism tells them that being below average can never be good enough.
This is a positive feedback loop.
Irresponsible leftists say they won’t take care of a woman, the woman then feels anxiety (can I find a rightist?) or depression (I can’t find a rightist…). These feelings make her feel like a loser (e.g. a whore), and thus she needs to support irresponsibility as a social norm, which then…
—
Ultimately universities are unnecessary and I frankly have no sympathy for scholars who are so weak they need a large, State-legible institution to force them to coordinate effectively. Get swole, couch potatoes.
—
I can confirm a spiritual world for you right now if you like, and use it to explain why these studies don’t find anything useful. Most often they’re trying to find material evidence of immaterial events, which, for some reason, doesn’t work out for them…
That is indeed interesting. Especially since it’s not outright negative.
I’m talking about Left-Wing people, in general. If you add “wealthy” to it, then it becomes a different kettle of fish.
I recall seeing, multiple times, from ‘Audacious Epigone’, that liberals do miscegenate more than conservatives. (Sadly, I cannot find the exact blog posts right now to prove it…)
Anyway, still: I would bet that WEALTHY liberals are more likely to miscegenate than conservative counterparts of similar wealth.
The psychological projection of Edward Dutton is really off the charts.
He is a proven liar who was also found guilty of plagiarism.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Edward_Dutton
His main associate and co-author Emil Kirkegaard is a perjuror in contempt of court.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Emil_O._W._Kirkegaard
Both of them are involved with a fake university / diploma mill that charges over $100 per course to download some crappy videos.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/GegenUni
Another big reason universities are doomed is because public schooling is deliberately designed to displace effective education.
https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/why-we-stopped-making-einsteins
I didn’t have a tutor personally; I had to tutor myself. And I certainly did it by attending class and doing homework as little as possible.
Citation issue: irrationalwiki.
The jewish left right paradigm…
Interesting because!
They’ve destroyed U.S. and it’s hidden by ” geniuses” celebrating their celebrity status
https://illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Dodd-Report-to-the-Reece-Committee-on-Foundations-1954.pdf
Page 4 PROPAGANDA
Page 6 POTUS KOLLUSION
Page 8 anti defamation league
?????????????????????????????
http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/dodd/interview.htm
This exposes the entire BRIT ish rhodesRottenshield “deepstate” scam on ameriKa
https://www.heritage-history.com/index.php?c=read&author=fagan&book=illuminati&story=part3
Jacob was the son of a Rabbi who was born in one of the Rothschild’s houses in Frankfurt, Germany.
Actually; Jacob came here to carry out four specific assignments.
Most important, was to acquire control of America’s money-system.
Find desirable men, who for a price, would be willing to serve as stooges for the great conspiracy and promote them into high places in our federal government, our Congress, and the U.S. Supreme Court, and all federal agencies.
Create minority-group strife throughout the nations; particularly between the whites and blacks.
Create a movement to destroy religion in the United States; but Christianity to be the chief target.
Well! How did he do…?
Public law 102-14
Talmudic noachide laws for AmeriKan NON JEWS
Plato’s Democracy self-consciously becomes a ridiculously efficient genius-suppression society.
There are still great minds. Nobody cares, though. Nobody reads them.
In America’s case, the schools are, among other things, extremely effective religious madrassas that instill uncompromising fundamentalism.
Those Twatter screenshots echo something I’ve banged on about for a while now: that as cognitive horsepower increases, willingness to participate in bullshit declines.
Smart folks aren’t retarded – they already know that participation-in-bullshit would be an easy way to be financially comfortable, and were they to apply themselves to participation-in-bullshit they would outperform. They just have different preferences to normies: they are willing to forsake (some) material comfort and “status”, for freedom to do stuff that they find satisfying.
So I don’t accept the conclusion offered by “The Polymath” – that there is a problem of The Inappropriately Excluded, which is the origin of the black-background-white-text screenshot (the one from Wonn Jikk).
There are a couple of reasons for my heresy:
First: past some point the smart folks “exclude” themselves – voluntarily. Not everyone’s satisfied by a well-remunerated hamster-wheel.
Second: from the enterprise’s perspective it’s entirely appropriate to be circumspect about hiring people who are a priori likely to become dissatisfied, and who can walk away on a whim.
The world is full of midwits who hate their jobs but can’t walk away – because they can’t afford to walk away. To the extent that a smart-adjacent midwit can readily find alternative employment at the same ‘package’, modern workplaces homogeneous, so the enterprising midwit isn’t going from the frypan to the fire… they’re going from the frypan to another frypan.
As a very direct result, the mass of men live lives of quiet desperation.
It’s not smart people’s job to fix that: the Cave People can’t be saved, and if they were smarter they would realise that anybody promising to save them is a midwit charlatan.
Rather than inappropriately excluded, the field is inappropriately exclusive.
Indeed, the 130+ are making the correct decision by avoiding it.
The field itself also makes efforts to exclude them, but mainly out of sour grapes. If they had them the field would gain much prestige.
If you’re really smart you realize “appropriate” is a profane word far more disgusting than any racial slur, and stop using it or any of its forms.
Nitpick: the midwit could also be a glassblower or a plumber, they’re just too dumb to realize it would be a better option that what they picked.
It is not because a leftist wants to miscegenate, it is because the bottom trash of humanity can’t afford to live in the nice neighbourhoods – and they HAVE TO vote for leftists, because the leftists give them other people’s things for free
The leftists that “can choose”, will have NOTHING to do with the trash neighbourhoods, as you can see for example from the BLM founders – as soon as they managed to swindle a couple of million bucks, they moved to a WHITE neighbourhood