-10

I found this question in quora

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-it-seem-like-many-haskellers-are-libertarian

It seems that some programmers are libertarians. You can see there. High level programmers tend to be libertarians.

This questions answer that more clearly https://www.quora.com/It-seems-like-many-computer-scientists-and-programmers-are-either-libertarians-or-anarchists-or-something-along-those-lines-Is-there-something-about-the-field-that-attracts-people-who-are-naturally-inclined-to-such

High level programmers of course have high IQ. I wonder if high IQ people, in general, tend to be libertarians.

I suppose higher IQ people tend to be more innovative and will make more money when there is no regulation.

I think they are more likely to be libertarian.

Also higher IQ people are more likely to distrust big brothers.

I may be wrong.

Are there any correlation between libertarian-ism and IQ.

Note: The reason I asked is because the 2 factors are pretty much measurable. I am not saying that libertarianism is good (I like georgism). I am just asking if there is a correlation and why.

For example, higher IQ people are more likely to use drugs and are far less likely to get addicted by it. Only libertarians support legalization of drugs. I think that's one of the reason why I suspect higher IQ people tend to be libertarian. Am I correct?

  • 20
    All an IQ test tells you about a person is how good that person is at solving IQ test puzzles. I don't see how this question is useful. – Philipp Apr 4 '18 at 15:46
  • 5
    Why do you suppose or think these things? What evidence are your opinions based on? – Steve Melnikoff Apr 4 '18 at 15:58
  • 4
    @Phillip - That's not totally true. It has modest correlations with things like academic success. – Obie 2.0 Apr 4 '18 at 19:38
  • 10
    And of course, how intelligent a person believes himself to be is not necessarily related to how intelligent a person is... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect – SJuan76 Apr 4 '18 at 21:25
  • 2
    @Obie2.0 While that's true, there is a very healthy debate among Psychologists as to what those correlations actually mean, or what the direction of causality may be. Personally, I don't think they are useless numbers, but should definitely be taken with a grain of salt because they do not account for a huge number of social and economic factors. – Texas Red May 2 '18 at 5:04
12

The evidence is contradictory and does not appear to be uniform internationally or over time.

In the United States, at this moment, people with more education tend to be more socially liberal, while not necessarily favoring more economic regulation. And, more intelligent people tend to be more partisan. But, education is not a perfect proxy for intelligence, and this has not always been the case.

Studies in Britain and Brazil found that people who were more intelligent favored more moderate political parties.

In the U.S., in contrast, a lot of "unaffiliated" voters, who are sometimes characterized as ideologically "moderate", actually do not have coherent political ideologies, are easily swayed from one stance to another depending upon how it is presented or who is presenting it, and are more influenced in their political decision making by the personalities of the candidates and by referendum style decision making (i.e. voting the bums out when your personal circumstances are less good, and keeping incumbents when your personal circumstances are favorable).

The difference may have something to do with the fact that the U.S. has only two viable political parties, with many people who aren't strongly partisan simply having never thought seriously about politics; they are, instead, largely apolitical. But, in Britain and Brazil there are multiple electorally viable parties to choose from, and choosing a moderate one is a choice that calls for more nuance which calls for greater intelligence.

Also, the voting and ideological preferences of more educated voters in the United States have shifted significantly in the last fifty years or so, in part, as part of a general process called "realignment" in which the policies and demographics associated with particular political parties has almost completely flipped the role of the Democratic and Republican political parties. Since political identification is often fixed as a young adult, this transitional phase has led to an incoherent set of associations for the electorate as a whole.

For example, many older people who identify as Christian and conservative Republican in the Northeastern United States did so when that identification was much more centrist than it is today.

A 2010 study did find that people in the U.S. who identified as libertarian at that time had higher IQ than those who identified as liberal or conservative, but some of that is a function of the comparisons not really being apples to apples. Lots of less educated people who have basically libertarian views don't self-identify as libertarian because they have never heard of the term. But, there aren't great instruments to distinguish between liberals with coherent political ideologies, relative to people who have vaguely liberal ideas but no really clearly articulated or considered political ideology.

A self-identification as libertarian implies that one has had the leisure and inclination to develop an overarching personal political theory, in a way that identification as liberal or conservative does not. In much the same way, someone who has given religious issues enough serious thought to self-identify as atheist or agnostic will have a higher IQ, on average, than someone who merely identifies as "non-religious" and has never given religious issues much serious consideration.

  • Your issue seems to concentrate on conservatism. Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are even more free market than conservative and more liberal than liberal on social issues. – user4951 Apr 7 '18 at 17:02
  • 1
    @J.Chang I am discussing both conservatives and liberals to contrast those forms of political identification with libertarianism, which cannot be discussed in a vacuum, which the question asks for a comparison. – ohwilleke Apr 9 '18 at 15:31
  • 1
    @user4951 the only social issues that so-called modern liberals are actually liberal on is sexuality. There's not another single issue that their ideology lines up with John Locke (the father of Liberalism) on. And so-called Conservatives are no longer fiscally conservative and haven't been for a very long time. – Aporter Feb 17 at 13:35
  • @user4951 good point – Aporter Feb 18 at 1:06
0

I searched high and low for any sources that could serve as unbiased to make the argument for answering this question. I found several sources that claimed liberals were more intelligent and other sources that claimed the opposite. It was obvious that liberal publications made the case for liberals and visa versa.

The tie breaker for me is the following:

The Us Founding Fathers who were without a doubt the most intelligent group of people who ever came together to form a government. They warned us in prophetic fashion of nearly every single problem that has now been caused by our government. They created the framework for the once most successful country on the planet and they were in modern terms, all Libertarians.

  • Your founding father wants huge inheritance tax. That is very unlibertarian. Perhaps they're meritocratic – user4951 Feb 17 at 15:45
  • 1
    @user4951 what Founding Father is that? There was no inheritance tax during the Founding generation – Aporter Feb 18 at 1:05
  • google.com/… I think they are a bit georgian. Definitely more conservative than current ones – user4951 Feb 18 at 19:00
  • @user4951 I wouldn't go as far as calling this article "fake news", but it's definitely "spin". He is using quotes and taking them out of context to paint a false picture. – Aporter Feb 21 at 1:10
  • @user4951 In 1802 when Thomas Jefferson took office he eliminated all direct taxation on US citizens. Tax free America. This was Jefferson’s vision and I have quotes from him to back it up. As 1 example, this was NOT a man who would have supported redistribution schemes like a inheritance tax – Aporter Feb 21 at 1:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.