Home / HBD / Liberals Are The Real Authoritarians

Liberals Are The Real Authoritarians

bernie-comrade

No, really. This post’s title isn’t an ironic invocation of leading cuckservative pundits. Esssra Klein and his merry band of (((voxlets))) love hissing about authoritarian conservatives; it’s one of their favorite pastimes, along with getting assaulted by dindus and post hoc rationalizing a way to blame )))White((( men.

Liberals have been trotting out the “conservatives are authoritarians” claim in one form or another for generations. It’s a Stalin-esque example of the rhetoric trick favored by leftoid radicals of pathologizing the normal, healthy instincts of one’s ideological enemies. Remote psychological diagnosis, and the Commies were very fond of its agit-prop utility.

Yet, all around us in the current year we are besieged with evidence to the contrary. Conservatives aren’t the ones crashing Trump rallies and stabbing people. Nor are they the ones leading modern-day witch hunts against crime thinkers like James Watson or Jason Richwine and getting them fired from their jobs. Nor are conservatives running gargantuan media conglomerates and information gateways dedicated to purging wrongthink. Nor are conservatives – actual conservatives as the word is commonly understood, not cuckboys like Paul Ryan – using extra-Constitutional executive privilege to foist hundreds of thousands (soon to be millions) of third world refugees on small town America and committing what in a sane world would qualify as treason.

When your lying eyes conflict with social science studies pumped out by tenured academics living the easy life in leftoid hothouses, and propagated by credulous media leftoids whose preexisting biases have been confirmed, the way to bet is that the leftoid study has the problem with accurately assessing reality.

And that’s the case with the flurry of “authoritarian Trump supporters” articles that have appeared recently in such esteemed publications as the Huffington ShitPost, the Washington Post-Op, and The New York Beta Times. A major retraction was issued, unsurprisingly, to very little media coverage, essentially overturning the cherished beliefs of smug liberals.

Conservative political beliefs not linked to psychotic traits, as study claimed

Researchers have fixed a number of papers after mistakenly reporting that people who hold conservative political beliefs are more likely to exhibit traits associated with psychoticism, such as authoritarianism and tough-mindedness.

As one of the notices specifies, now it appears that liberal political beliefs are linked with psychoticism.

WOOPS

When we asked Hatemi to elaborate on what that magnitude was — how much more likely were people who held conservative or liberal views to exhibit certain traits? — he said:

[T]he correlations are spurious, so the direction or even magnitude is not suitable to elaborate on at all- that’s the point of all our papers and the general findings.

If the correlations are spurious and unworthy of elaboration, then WHY THE FUCK DID EVERY GODDAMNED LEFTOID PRICK IN EXISTENCE run with the erroneously reported study results that conservatives are authoritarian?

Even if the errors don’t affect the conclusions of the paper, they matter, Ludeke told us:

The erroneous results represented some of the larger correlations between personality and politics ever reported; they were reported and interpreted, repeatedly, in the wrong direction; and then cited at rates that are (for this field) extremely high. And the relationship between personality and politics is, as we note in the paper, quite a “hot” topic, with a large number of new papers appearing every year. So although the errors do not matter for the result that the authors (rightly) see as their most important, I obviously think the errors themselves matter quite a lot, especially for what it says about the scientific process both pre- and post-review.

Amen. What it says is that a shitlib social scientist found out liberals are actually more likely to be authoritarian, but through partisan negligence or deliberate deception permitted the results of his study to be published and reported as if the exact opposite were true.

I’d ask Essssssra Klein for his thoughts on this retraction, but I fear he’d respond with midnight raids and one way tickets to the gulag.