Just how stupid are rightwing bloggers?
Really quite stupid, based on the following evidence:
1) Iain Dale, noted rightwinger, says Tom Harris MP, noted rightwinger, is an influential leftwinger. Tom Harris MP, noted rightwinger, agrees. It only makes sense in stupiduniverse.
2) Iain Dale, noted rightwinger, says people on the left have no sense of humour, and his faithful trolls applaud and stamp their feet stupidly. When proved wrong, the notedly stupid rightwinger does a smiley face thing with his keyboard in the comments, in an attempt to be look both knowing and supercilious, as opposed to really quite stupid. It doesn’t work.
3) Sensible liberalish economist finds no-one with a rightwing blog about economics worth even vaguely engaging with, because ‘it’s like listening to the last 5 people in a Surrey golfclubhouse, when one of them has mentioned Immigrants and Gordon Brown. ‘
Precisely, though I’ve never been in a Surrey golfclubhouse.
4) Sensible liberal economist says sensibly (in comments), in response to this sensible Bickerstaffe Record post:
‘When I started out on this, I was attracted to libertarianism, just because it was so simple. Don’t worry about looking into how the world works; don’t look at how public spending is actually apportioned, don’t ask yourself difficult questions about market failures and abuse and the use of power and so forth – just assume that everything that stops short of perfect is the government. I was never really taken in – the very simplicity of it made me suspicious – but the eagerness with which certain simpleminded people leap onto it is definitely a reason it is loved so much.’
Precisely. Again.
The real world provides us with sufficient evidence to allow us to rest our economic case without the bizarre contortions that Leftists need to undertake to support their ideology.
Being as economic success is positively correlated with intelligence and the most economically successful vote blue, the evidence suggests the opposite of what you suggest.
Thanks for the link Paul.
I have to come back against Praguetory on his statement that ‘economic success is positively correlated with intelligence’.
Jared Diamond’s book Guns Germs and Steel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel
begins with his observation about how much BRIGHTER the economically underdeveloped Pacific islanders he knows are. They HAVE to be because the advantages of built up technology, divisions of labour (an American can be rich knowing just one thing: a Samoan tribesman has to know almost everything), allow relatively thick people to prosper.
This also happens within societies. Not invariably, but enough to question PT’s view. It is this inability to recognise how much of ‘their’ success in fact rests on institutional and social conditions beyond their control that really maddens me about the blinder right wingers. Yes, well done for being born into a good family, good at maths and with access to a nice city job. You deserve that island.
Incidentally, I’m not saying this because I’m chippy: I have done spectacularly well from the circumstances described above. I can do maths – went to Oxford – and managed to make a huge amount from a short-ish career. Why? Stable property rights, luck, and starting the career in question precisely at the beginning of a bubble (1996). If I had started in 1990, much worse. Same if I had started in 2002. Very lucky. I don’t quite understand why more ‘insiders’ don’t appreciate their luck.
Thanks for ‘engaging’, Giles, but what’s with the anecdotes? Nice stories but hardly a rebuttal to the hypothesis that intelligence significantly effects earnings. I think I was arguing that the correlation between IQ and earnings was significant not deterministic. With respect to the irrelevant musings on Samoan tribesmen, studies show that the more ‘complex’ the job the greater the correlation coefficient so in a developed economy increasingly focused on the service sector more intelligent people are most likely to be found in well-off Tory areas (the Surrey golfclubs!).
As an aside, it’s odd that you think that right-wingers views are only informed by their narrow personal experience!
I can’t help noticing that you use the term “right-winger” in a pejorative sense which, in Labour Party context, it certainly isn’t.
Tom
Well it is if you’re on the left of the party. Just as Luke, for example will happily use the word ‘lefties’ pejoratively to conjur up the images he seeks to, so I do the same. I don’t see your point.
Nice of you to drop in though – sorry i missed the comment for a bit.